Re: [PATCH] kill no-op buf macros

[Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>]

David Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 09:08:15AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 10:41:09PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> It looks like these macros are not particularly interesting... this patch kills 
>>> them.
>> Hmm, I'm not sure about some of these..
>>
>>> #define XFS_BUF_BUSY(bp)	do { } while (0)
>>> #define XFS_BUF_ISBUSY(bp)	(1)
>> This ones used on 2.4, I'd like to get Daves thoughts on whether
>> we do the right thing here based on his buffer cache fu.
> 
> XFS_BUF_ISBUSY() is only ever used in ASSERT() statements, so I
> think that can go. On 2.4:
> 
> #define XFS_BUF_BUSY(bp) ((bp)->b_flags |= XBF_FORCEIO)
> 
> The XBF_FORCEIO affects how we do partial page I/O on 2.4, but is
> unused on 2.6. On 2.4, if the flag is set, we ignore the
> buffer_uptodate() status of the buffers on the page and re-read all
> the buffers in the range specified.  For writes, we always write all
> the buffers on the page.

Hm, 2.4 just seemed so old by now I forgot all about it :)  Sorry about that, 
thanks for the comments, I'll re-jigger taking this (and the rest of your 
comments) into account.

Thanks,

-Eric