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 A57447CA2 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 08:22:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30BC2AC009 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 06:22:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id FKy91dABvuTPc5y3 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 06:22:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 06:22:07 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/16] xfs: rmap btree add more reserved blocks Message-ID: <20160310142207.GD29058@infradead.org> References: <1457410578-30233-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1457410578-30233-4-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1457410578-30233-4-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 Sorry for the second reply to the same mail - I expect this defintion to be in patch 7, where it logically belongs.. > +#define XFS_RMAP_BLOCK(mp) \ > (xfs_sb_version_hasfinobt(&((mp)->m_sb)) ? \ > XFS_FIBT_BLOCK(mp) + 1 : \ > XFS_IBT_BLOCK(mp) + 1) Is there any good reason for the variable offset for the rmap block. Yes, it saves one otherwise unused block per AG, but fixed offsets for metadata make a format much easier to understand. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs