From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:19:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m721JVdF023234 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 18:19:32 -0700 Received: from ipmail01.adl6.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id C81F6352B29 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 18:20:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail01.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail01.adl6.internode.on.net [203.16.214.146]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id GDD0G901SnYBkZkT for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:20:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 11:20:42 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/21] implement generic xfs_btree_rshift Message-ID: <20080802012042.GN6201@disturbed> References: <20080729193125.GP19104@lst.de> <20080730060808.GP13395@disturbed> <20080801194914.GI1263@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20080801194914.GI1263@lst.de> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 09:49:14PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > + XFS_BB_NUM_BITS, &first, &last); > > > + xfs_trans_log_buf(cur->bc_tp, bp, first, last); > > > + } else { > > > + /* XXX(hch): maybe factor out into a method? */ > > > + xfs_trans_log_inode(cur->bc_tp, cur->bc_private.b.ip, > > > + XFS_ILOG_FBROOT(cur->bc_private.b.whichfork)); > > > > I don't think it is necessary at this point. > > It's the only leakage of the detailed inode root implementation into > the generic code, so I'm still wondering whether a method would be > better. Ah, right. yes, it probably would be cleaner to do it as a separate method, but Ǐ don't think it's that important right now. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com