From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o8N0dKMq091778 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:39:21 -0500 Received: from mail.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 97B8B93E3A for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 17:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.internode.on.net (bld-mail12.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.97]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id CoLLYjxYLpS9PMU1 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 17:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 10:40:12 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/16] xfs: implement batched inode lookups for AG walking Message-ID: <20100923004012.GK2614@dastard> References: <1285137869-10310-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1285137869-10310-13-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20100922173306.GE5697@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100922173306.GE5697@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 01:33:06PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > + int (*grab)(struct xfs_inode *ip), > > I think we can do without this callback. The inode verification that > needs to be done is always the same. The only difference is that the > dqrele code skips the quota inodes - but this can easily be done in > the execute callback, and given that it's a slow path the additional > two igrab calls won't hurt either. Seems fair - the grab callback is from the first version where the reclaim walk was not split out so there was significant differences. I'll clean that up. > To be symmetic with that the IRELE call should also be moved from the > execute callbacks into the caller. All this is stuff enabled by > splitting out the reclaim code earlier which was pretty different in > this area. In fact just moving the validation + igrab and IRELE into > common code might just be done in a separate patch between the last one > and this. Yup, that makes it a lot cleaner. Will do. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs