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 F318C7F52 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:12:30 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EAA6AC00A for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:12:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:12:23 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] xfs: format log items write directly into the linear CIL buffer Message-ID: <20131210161223.GC19510@infradead.org> References: <20131129083919.207915844@bombadil.infradead.org> <20131129084001.028583376@bombadil.infradead.org> <20131204003712.GE10988@dastard> <20131209190028.GW1935@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131209190028.GW1935@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, Dec 09, 2013 at 01:00:28PM -0600, Ben Myers wrote: > > And if we need to guarantee alignment, then maybe roundup here to > > ensure we don't end up with bad offsets? That would require padding > > the allocation of the buffer to take it into account, too.... > > > > Other than this concern, the code looks fine. > > Christoph, what about this alignment issue? I think Dave is right, but I haven't had time to look at the issue in detail and respin the patchset yet. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs