From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 609B641C72; Wed, 1 May 2024 22:44:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714603452; cv=none; b=hSQoRXpDwcz15i3/bZGQbh2UXEWi1CXCfFK+Ry9wGNNueb0fKnj9Vlw/xygK8lW0Seo+KEMED9YFBWNVj4fugYhn97oQbGQKRjifGkeSBfvqeV/I+haMR/jE//Y/BgnCLZeNYRL8tIpJGhUsaNye1DyQ8zGixridHn24WweRWv4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714603452; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TKUvSSXsWS5zMUcu5OOtqpokgCKF2aW1Ohd7O4rztig=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fffoXEIlaHCVWTSuRTs0TaVam7PVFjFL/140otyq12vp7VqxJFEd7ofXmXOAmeCUVLIuK4BAvbx2AdX3i/bRvqp/qp9IO95XOkDgKFkYSiBwQ/a43MrTAn+zvCkrR8m1UjpyVwkPdlwTHgWFdYjktke00ZPl29QRVAEPT96W6wY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XnTrAT6h; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XnTrAT6h" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9DB5C113CC; Wed, 1 May 2024 22:44:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1714603451; bh=TKUvSSXsWS5zMUcu5OOtqpokgCKF2aW1Ohd7O4rztig=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XnTrAT6hEm4fZhRznVzJj1Hsh7jkXc91s6fjnnc8O1O2oxWxKmUYuqBBoFsbNTLtX vL+QL+hiC4tNDUbFNadXDXzhgV+54j6trZgDK0vDKcmvB55EuBeo8W/3s2sVNmvgE5 4mlPdJSj6rMqRx3VNF5IChEh0PXXEJTrp/H70NTd1hYkKG3nICBqmAigRYYCcCJVdi fAeytEYx8G2P9T0anQhvmBkHPDwWbwHlrG9YJtA2DCUpi+4d0YRa/CW6OfWAEdHkxZ Ae3mjafjYsgIAuHuLOjppgcFZdoID3M9YMd3qNAyiGwyUwJdX1V989vqVJfD/qgNek MyAL8tYJTj2DQ== Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 15:44:11 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Christoph Hellwig , Chandan Babu R Cc: aalbersh@redhat.com, ebiggers@kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, alexl@redhat.com, walters@verbum.org, fsverity@lists.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/26] xfs: widen flags argument to the xfs_iflags_* helpers Message-ID: <20240501224411.GK360919@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <171444680291.957659.15782417454902691461.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <171444680584.957659.3744585033664433370.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:54:30PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 08:27:29PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong > > > > xfs_inode.i_flags is an unsigned long, so make these helpers take that > > as the flags argument instead of unsigned short. This is needed for the > > next patch. > > > > While we're at it, remove the iflags variable from xfs_iget_cache_miss > > because we no longer need it. > > I just reinvented this for another flag in work in progress code. > Can we just get included in the current for-next tree? Chandan? Any thoughts on pushing this for 6.10? --D