From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: rearrange some code in xfs_bmap for better locality
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:36:29 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130212013629.GB10731@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <511973FE.5000608@sgi.com>
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 04:43:10PM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 02/10/13 23:05, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >From: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com>
> >
> >xfs_bmap.c is a big file, and some of the related code is spread all
> >throughout the file requiring function prototypes for static
> >function and jumping all through the file to follow a single call
> >path. Rearrange the code so that:
> >
> > a) related functionality is grouped together; and
> > b) functions are grouped in call dependency order
> >
> >While the diffstat is large, there are no code changes in the patch;
> >it is just moving the functionality around and removing the function
> >prototypes at the top of the file. The resulting layout of the code
> >is as follows (top of file to bottom):
> >
> > - miscellaneous helper functions
> > - extent tree block counting routines
> > - debug/sanity checking code
> > - bmap free list manipulation functions
> > - inode fork format manipulation functions
> > - internal/external extent tree seach functions
> > - extent tree manipulation functions used during allocation
> > - functions used during extent read/allocate/removal
> > operations (i.e. xfs_bmapi_write, xfs_bmapi_read,
> > xfs_bunmapi and xfs_getbmap)
> >
> >This means that following logic paths through the bmapi code is much
> >simpler - most of the code relevant to a specific operation is now
> >clustered together rather than spread all over the file....
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com>
> >---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c |10659 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 5261 insertions(+), 5398 deletions(-)
>
> The organization looks good to me. If the file is getting that many
> changes, isn't it time to fix all those spaces in the file? (looks
> like there are over 2500 unnecessary spaces in place of tabs).
My "misplaced whitepsace" syntax highlighting doesn't trip on any,
so I didn't notice it. i.e the whitespace is entirely spaces or
entirely tabs and not tabs/spaces in combination.
A quick search shows that they are mostly in the variable
declaration comment formatting - I tend simply to remove those
comments as I modify the surrounding code because, IMO, they
are almost entirely redundant as we have well named structures
and variables.
So, yeah, maybe a followup patch that kills the comments and fixes
the whitespace damage is in order.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-12 1:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-11 5:05 [PATCH 0/2] xfs: couple of patches for 3.9 Dave Chinner
2013-02-11 5:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs: limit speculative prealloc size on sparse files Dave Chinner
2013-02-11 22:00 ` Mark Tinguely
2013-02-12 13:35 ` Brian Foster
2013-02-14 23:31 ` Ben Myers
2013-02-11 5:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: rearrange some code in xfs_bmap for better locality Dave Chinner
2013-02-11 22:43 ` Mark Tinguely
2013-02-12 1:36 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
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=20130212013629.GB10731@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=tinguely@sgi.com \
--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