From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAA687CBF for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:12:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FEE7AC008 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 4IHdbOraFrENYwVD for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 06:40:11 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/27] xfs: split out xfs inode operations into separate file Message-ID: <20130618204011.GU29338@dastard> References: <1371032567-21772-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1371032567-21772-19-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20130612140519.GB28988@infradead.org> <20130613011414.GB29338@dastard> <20130613080009.GL29338@dastard> <20130617155644.GA26043@infradead.org> <20130617181411.GE20932@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130617181411.GE20932@sgi.com> 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Ben Myers Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 01:14:11PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > Hey Christoph, > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 08:56:44AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 06:00:09PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > So what I really think needs to happen here first is similar to the > > > dir2 header file re-org. That is, a header file to define the > > > format, and a header file to define the in-kernel structures and > > > APIs.... > > > > Yes, I think we need to do this rather sooner than later. In fact > > I'd feeling we need to tackle the whole header mess first before > > splitting the .c files. Making sure the on-disk format is in one > > or just a few headers is the most important bit of that. > > > > These days I'm actually of the opinion that we probably should be > > even more drastic about cutting the number of headers. For the > > on disk format a xfs_format.h for all the regular on disk format and > > maybe and xfs_log_format.h should be more than enough. > > I like the idea of having the entire on-disk format in just a few files. It > would be a nice clean up. I don't know if splitting the .c files needs to wait > on it though. I've got patches that separate out all shared user/kernel header information now. They QA'd OK overnight, so I'll post them in a short while. There's no more __KERNEL__ definitions in the code after the patch set... > > But back to the _ops.c naming. I really hate it and the best counter > > proposals I can come up with is to add a _common postfix to every file > > intended to be shared with userspace. > > I don't understand what you don't like about the _ops.c naming... I can make xfs_inode_ops.[ch] go away as xfs_inode.[ch] is no longer shared with userspace and contain kernel-only functionality. I didn't go as far as moving everything back into xfs_inode.[ch] because we want to merge some of it with xfs_iops.c, some with xfs_ialloc.c, etc... > > Using a directly also would make > > sense, but for some reason Kbuild always had problems with modules built > > from multiple directories and I'm more than glad that we finally managed > > to get rid of the subdirectories. > > but I really like the libxfs subdirectory idea. Any idea if the Kbuild issues > are sorted out? No idea - I don't know the issue is. However, if the issue has been fixed (or could be easily solved) then it seems like there is a rough agreement on moving towards a common shared libxfs base? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs