From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] xfs: merge xfs_buf_find() and xfs_buf_get_map()
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 15:06:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YrzM57Xg2LU4pEha@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrwB2JS9oVRh6l0L@infradead.org>
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 12:40:08AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > -static inline struct xfs_buf *
> > -xfs_buf_find_fast(
> > - struct xfs_perag *pag,
> > - struct xfs_buf_map *map)
> > -{
> > - struct xfs_buf *bp;
> > -
> > - bp = rhashtable_lookup(&pag->pag_buf_hash, map, xfs_buf_hash_params);
> > - if (!bp)
> > - return NULL;
> > - atomic_inc(&bp->b_hold);
> > - return bp;
> > -}
>
> > -static int
> > -xfs_buf_find_insert(
> > - struct xfs_buftarg *btp,
> > - struct xfs_perag *pag,
>
> Adding the function just in the last patch and moving them around
> here and slighty changing seems a little counter productive.
> I think just merging the two might actually end up with a result
> that is easier to review.
I read the second patch and it makes sense, but I'm also curious if
hch's suggestion here would make this change easier to read?
--D
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-29 22:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-27 6:08 [PATCH 0/6 v2] xfs: lockless buffer lookups Dave Chinner
2022-06-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 1/6] xfs: rework xfs_buf_incore() API Dave Chinner
2022-06-29 7:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-29 21:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 2/6] xfs: break up xfs_buf_find() into individual pieces Dave Chinner
2022-06-28 2:22 ` Chris Dunlop
2022-06-29 7:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-29 21:50 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: merge xfs_buf_find() and xfs_buf_get_map() Dave Chinner
2022-06-29 7:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-29 22:06 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2022-07-07 12:39 ` Dave Chinner
2022-06-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 4/6] xfs: reduce the number of atomic when locking a buffer after lookup Dave Chinner
2022-06-29 22:00 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 5/6] xfs: remove a superflous hash lookup when inserting new buffers Dave Chinner
2022-06-29 7:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-29 22:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: lockless buffer lookup Dave Chinner
2022-06-29 7:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-29 22:04 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-07-07 12:36 ` Dave Chinner
2022-07-07 17:55 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-07-11 5:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-07-07 2:40 ` [PATCH 0/6 v2] xfs: lockless buffer lookups Darrick J. Wong
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-07-07 23:52 [PATCH 0/6 v3] " Dave Chinner
2022-07-07 23:52 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: merge xfs_buf_find() and xfs_buf_get_map() Dave Chinner
2022-07-10 0:15 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-07-11 5:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-07-12 0:01 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YrzM57Xg2LU4pEha@magnolia \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox