Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: remove the xfs_dinode_t typedef

["Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 08:41:14PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> 
> On 8/12/21 7:16 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 11:31:31AM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > On 8/12/21 10:43 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > >    	/*
> > > >    	 * If the size is unreasonable, then something
> > > > @@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ xfs_iformat_extents(
> > > >     */
> > > >    STATIC int
> > > >    xfs_iformat_btree(
> > > > -	xfs_inode_t		*ip,
> > > > -	xfs_dinode_t		*dip,
> > > > +	struct xfs_inode	*ip,
> > > > +	struct xfs_dinode	*dip,
> > > >    	int			whichfork)
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > since you are also removing xfs_inode_t I'd like to ask if it is a good idea
> > [assuming you meant xfs_dinode_t here]
> 
> Hmm, I'm sorry but I really did mean xfs_inode_t.
> 
> Since the patch is named "remove the xfs_dinode_t  typedef" removing
> xfs_dinode_t is quite expected. But removing xfs_inode_t not so much, hence
> I'm asking if I should send a patch that removes completely xfs_inode_t as
> is done for xfs_dinode_t by this very patch.
> 
> I hope I'm not missing something :-).

OH, you were referencing specifically the conversion of the xfs_inode_t
in that hunk, not the general theme of removing xfs_dinode_t.  Ok, no
worries. :)

--D

> 
> 
> > 
> > > to send a separate patch removing all other instances of xfs_inode_t? (I'm
> > > happy to do it).
> > Seems like a reasonable thing to me.
> > 
> Great, thanks!
>