From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] xfs: use unhashed buffers for size checks
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:14:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100910031452.GC24409@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100909013806.GC29825@infradead.org>
On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 09:38:07PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +struct xfs_buf *
> > +xfs_buf_read_uncached(
> > + struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > + struct xfs_buftarg *target,
> > + xfs_daddr_t daddr,
> > + size_t length)
> > +{
> > + xfs_buf_t *bp;
> > + int error;
>
> struct xfs_buf and the same indentation as the parameters, please.
>
> > +
> > + bp = xfs_buf_get_noaddr(length, target);
>
> I think both the buf_get and buf_read interfaces for the non-hash
> buffers should have the same name. Either your uncached or maybe better
> unhashed? (And certainly no noaddr, which is not very useful)
I'll rename it *_uncached, because the hash is going away ;)
>
> > + if (!bp || XFS_BUF_ISERROR(bp))
> > + goto fail;
>
> xfs_buf_get_noaddr never returns an error in the buffer.
I'll fix all these - they are just CNP from the previous patch.
>
> Also this one returns the buffer locked, while buf_get_noaddr doesn't.
> I suspect we should also change buf_get_noaddr to return a locked buffer
> to make it consistant with all other buf_read/get interfaces.
None of the other callers require locked buffers. I'll leave this
for a separate patch set for the moment.
> > +struct xfs_buf * xfs_buf_read_uncached(struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > + struct xfs_buftarg *target,
> > + xfs_daddr_t daddr, size_t length);
>
> wrong placement of the *
>
>
> This patch, or at least the introduction of the new read helper should
> be moved before patch 1 so that we don't add code that gets removed a
> little later.
Yes, I plan to do that.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-10 3:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-08 15:12 [RFC] [PATCH 0/4] Replace buffer cache hash with rbtrees Dave Chinner
2010-09-08 15:12 ` [PATCH 1/4] xfs: kill XBF_FS_MANAGED buffers Dave Chinner
2010-09-09 1:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-09-10 3:10 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-10 21:17 ` Alex Elder
2010-09-08 15:12 ` [PATCH 2/4] xfs: use unhashed buffers for size checks Dave Chinner
2010-09-09 1:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-09-10 3:14 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2010-09-10 21:33 ` Alex Elder
2010-09-08 15:12 ` [PATCH 3/4] xfs: remove buftarg hash for external devices Dave Chinner
2010-09-09 1:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-09-08 15:12 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: convert buffer cache hash to rbtree Dave Chinner
2010-09-09 1:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-09-10 3:22 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-13 16:59 ` Alex Elder
2010-09-13 16:53 ` Alex Elder
2010-09-14 7:13 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100910031452.GC24409@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox