From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6285B7F98 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 12:16:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F634304051 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id LP7ci80BxUSdFauA (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:16:02 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: flush both inodes in xfs_swap_extents Message-ID: <20140731171602.GF22173@infradead.org> References: <1406787128-11897-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1406787128-11897-3-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1406787128-11897-3-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.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: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com > int > +xfs_swap_extent_flush( > + struct xfs_inode *ip) > +{ > + int error; nipick: shouldn't the arguments and local variables align to the same level? Also a local struct inode variable instead of using VFS_I(ip) 4 times would be nice. Otherwise looks good, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs