From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmailnode02.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.148]:64795 "EHLO ipmailnode02.adl6.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752900AbdHOBgs (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2017 21:36:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:36:45 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: refactor xfs_trans_roll Message-ID: <20170815013645.GD21024@dastard> References: <20170813144216.11192-1-hch@lst.de> <20170813144216.11192-2-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170813144216.11192-2-hch@lst.de> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 04:42:14PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Split xfs_trans_roll into a low-level helper that just rolls the > actual transaction and a new higher level xfs_trans_roll_inode > that takes care of logging and rejoining the inode. This gets > rid of the NULL inode case, and allows to simplify the special > cases in the deferred operation code. .... > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c > index 2011620008de..c43e78b5c035 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c > @@ -1034,26 +1034,19 @@ xfs_trans_cancel( > * chunk we've been working on and get a new transaction to continue. > */ > int > -xfs_trans_roll( > - struct xfs_trans **tpp, > - struct xfs_inode *dp) > +__xfs_trans_roll( > + struct xfs_trans **tpp) Do we really need the "__" prefix? Seems unnecessary to me because all the existing callers are modified... Other than that, every else looks good. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com