From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DDACC433E0 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 01:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF8A820714 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 01:50:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727995AbgFOBuH (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jun 2020 21:50:07 -0400 Received: from mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.249]:41817 "EHLO mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727946AbgFOBuG (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jun 2020 21:50:06 -0400 Received: from dread.disaster.area (pa49-180-124-177.pa.nsw.optusnet.com.au [49.180.124.177]) by mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A56363A4DAD; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 11:50:02 +1000 (AEST) Received: from dave by dread.disaster.area with local (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1jkeG5-0001od-O2; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 11:49:57 +1000 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 11:49:57 +1000 From: Dave Chinner To: Brian Foster Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/30] xfs: factor xfs_iflush_done Message-ID: <20200615014957.GU2040@dread.disaster.area> References: <20200604074606.266213-1-david@fromorbit.com> <20200604074606.266213-30-david@fromorbit.com> <20200609131249.GC40899@bfoster> <20200609221431.GK2040@dread.disaster.area> <20200610130833.GB50747@bfoster> <20200611001622.GN2040@dread.disaster.area> <20200611140709.GB56572@bfoster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200611140709.GB56572@bfoster> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=QIgWuTDL c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=k3aV/LVJup6ZGWgigO6cSA==:117 a=k3aV/LVJup6ZGWgigO6cSA==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=nTHF0DUjJn0A:10 a=7-415B0cAAAA:8 a=Bs-5f6dHGa3q-bvnwekA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=biEYGPWJfzWAr4FL6Ov7:22 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:07:09AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > TBH, I think this patch should probably be broken down into two or three > independent patches anyways. To what end? The patch is already small, it's simple to understand and it's been tested. What does breaking it up into a bunch more smaller patches actually gain us? It means hours more work on my side without any change in the end result. It's -completely wasted effort- if all I'm doing this for is to get you to issue a RVB on it. Fine grained patches do not come for free, and in a patch series that is already 30 patches long making it even longer just increases the time and resources it costs *me* to maintian it until it is merged. > What's the issue with something like the > appended diff (on top of this patch) in the meantime? If the multiple > list logic is truly necessary, reintroduce it when it's used so it's > actually reviewable.. Nothing. Except it causes conflicts further through my patch set which do the work of removing this AIL specific code. IOWs, it just *increases the amount of work I have to do* without actually providing any benefit to anyone... -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com