From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 78D5F344DA4 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:46:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782492409; cv=none; b=DK1m0Pv8Qmsap8IKFvyClyTQHywRyDGWFpN/QvVf7zzG4+qi4bItFznKBq2OwOwq7BKN4xBNrQJsRRV6sLu24Na84JtsUFdtyHiSmwPLuAcQRVCCKc+kJxHMA1GYx/+Hd4NPCjrDd15VgDWWPnW94ZS+yffmMDAfOpOtQjszYQM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782492409; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GIT4XksCV5jymrTSFE8hPMwSbHL8qEpcIX5EhXhpW7c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=dV9qrxlTh8M7X9noJtP7m15oVS552a+EwX4qLbfDlNfNzVrceBfgGqyyEtL0E9cEARSfFltzn5UURdWc+i6EjQmsRhFbefFZFYdvjakhY7Fr9rwaKuYo7uQuautFgjlHEy2kHgSnhAOsXT+zLcAuZvyMtPSjagnnMd6KqJcBxuA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=BEvvAciz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="BEvvAciz" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id F11C41F000E9; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:46:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1782492408; bh=/oHcF3OQI7OT7F39d7yqmjDWRpTD6nov1HX97KDlR7I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=BEvvAciz7u25eDHos8DpFwWoZVKpWTSy75WTMb2BeNyGDrwMDWzeueFIFHTY1A9n7 X0pBKsJvJ1kjclCoLvO9ZIOooPllELDqbAqWTt090tA6uypLtoQY/pyZ23hY/tsQhC j7Kyxa4rIWPC4tDW1eRA5WPIGVNjS3F8M+qD7MJqGNy940kBW/qRnuONzITgu2pjzC a5lDyp+utUO0h/xbQKYd5w2DYkuCZt0Weq66Fh4KdUklrz6KH++ONSxnLLtxMEHuX4 mi4vfLqOe6+yoZoJGfisWlzzUa1O8kTBQu6sZ+cCDpSjyAy3BZccmDntlgWUauEs2h wW6CKVdxRL8Pg== Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2026 09:46:47 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: aalbersh@kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] xfs_scrub: stop user file scan if caller already aborte Message-ID: <20260626164647.GX6078@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <178242801268.1981574.8079691316092703702.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <178242801323.1981574.6328414059926266139.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20260626045816.GA8786@lst.de> 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: <20260626045816.GA8786@lst.de> On Fri, Jun 26, 2026 at 06:58:16AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 03:54:28PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > + while (!si.aborted && (ret = scan_user_bulkstat(ctx, &si, &ino)) == 1) { > > /* empty */ > > } > > Style nit, but wouldn't this read better as: > > while (!si.aborted) { > ret = scan_user_bulkstat(ctx, &si, &ino) > if (ret != 1) > break; > } > > ? Yeah, that's fine too. > Otherwise looks good: > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig Thanks for reviewing! --D