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 8720A7CA0 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:35:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56DE9304043 for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2016 22:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id JFtDiKVjfe2OirJq for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2016 22:34:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 15:34:55 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] xfs_quota: additional changes to allow use on ext4 Message-ID: <20160822053455.GT19025@dastard> References: <1471356998-2876-1-git-send-email-billodo@redhat.com> <1471356998-2876-4-git-send-email-billodo@redhat.com> <20160822020650.GR19025@dastard> <86d459e4-6853-9f3c-3851-3e212f8c7adf@sandeen.net> <8c1b4044-ff69-f891-a4f4-b302bd3bfef3@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8c1b4044-ff69-f891-a4f4-b302bd3bfef3@sandeen.net> 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 11:46:14PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 8/21/16 10:34 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > On 8/21/16 9:06 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:16:38AM -0500, Bill O'Donnell wrote: > > ... > > >> static int > >> init_check_command( > >> const cmdinfo_t *ct) > >> { > >> if (!fspath) > >> return 1; > >> > >> /* Always run commands that we are told to skip here */ > >> if (ct->flags & CMD_SKIP_CHECK) > >> return 1; > >> > >> /* if it's an XFS filesystem, always run the command */ > >> if (!(fs_path->fs_flags & FS_FOREIGN)) > >> return 1; > > > > Sorry for the late review; thanks for getting on it, Dave - but, > > isn't "foreign ok" exactly == "skip check?" > > > > The only check that gets skipped is the foreign check, so just > > setting FOREIGN_OK seems to accomplish the same thing without > > more flag complexity, no? > > Oh, the subliminal brain reminded me that we want to be able to > issue help or quit whether or not we had the "-f" flag, regardless > of the filesystem, and that "foreign" isn't ok unless the -f flag > is set, so we do need a class of "always works" commands. Right, but that was something that was done in patch 1/3. I pointed out that no mention of it was made in the cmmit message there.... > I guess that was the point of the patch, but I suppose some clarity > in comments or commitlog would help slow people like me. ;) Right. better explanations needed all round :P Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs