From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:51997 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754099AbdDJRml (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:42:41 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 19:42:34 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] xfs: pass individual arguments to xfs_bmap_add_extent_hole_real Message-ID: <20170410174234.GB19106@lst.de> References: <20170403121833.7825-1-hch@lst.de> <20170403121833.7825-4-hch@lst.de> <20170410171316.GV4864@birch.djwong.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170410171316.GV4864@birch.djwong.org> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 10:13:16AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > - struct xfs_bmalloca *bma, > > - int whichfork) > > + struct xfs_trans *tp, > > + xfs_inode_t *ip, /* incore inode pointer */ > > + int whichfork, > > + xfs_extnum_t *idx, /* extent number to update/insert */ > > + xfs_btree_cur_t **curp, /* if *curp is null, not a btree */ > > + xfs_bmbt_irec_t *new, /* new data to add to file extents */ > > struct xfs_inode vs. xfs_inode_t ? Sure, I can fix this up. > > I was under the impression that we don't add comments to the function > arguments anymore, but TBH they don't bother me. It's copy and paste from the other function in the family that takes individual parameters. I can remove it.