From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m8K6XEGx004758 for ; Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:33:16 -0700 Received: from ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id F06AD939D06 for ; Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail05.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.145]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id FPGH8cPrx9oyWKtt for ; Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:34:43 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] XFS: Add ail pointer into log items Message-ID: <20080920063443.GO5811@disturbed> References: <1221317877-8333-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1221317877-8333-8-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20080919092820.GG11443@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080919092820.GG11443@infradead.org> 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, Sep 19, 2008 at 05:28:20AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 12:57:56AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > Add an xfs_ail pointer to log items so that the log items can > > reference the AIL directly during callbacks without needed a > > struct xfs_mount. > > Does it matter? I'd be a nice cleanup if you managed to get rid of > li_mountp, but without that I don't quite see the point. I haven't gone as far as removing the li_mountp yet - my intention is to do so, but I haven't written all the patches to do it yet. The way the li_mountp is used in some subsystems was very indirect in some cases (e.g. in the quota code) so I wanted to look a little more at it before deciding the best way to remove as much indirection as possible in those cases instead of adding more. It may be that adding xfs_mount pointers into some other structures is needed to clean this up totally... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com