From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from canpmsgout02.his.huawei.com (canpmsgout02.his.huawei.com [113.46.200.217]) (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 CB662372B31 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 12:02:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.217 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773144145; cv=none; b=ZitpdMkYPH9FQv2h1DDoUwN5BvpaIJsiIhn/rbglXLnilsnhYWDxruxpZzNB4ysDn7HnKW1Uf0InpDZtsNZskX53rT2dFYmRWUsXYAhClM/zcZGEZsshoV+g/JslN+7QxzbzOAfIbhHTQ0ccFTB9NfXFEVdDo5E0fvtQNyPdNRA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773144145; c=relaxed/simple; bh=at4BPLxLl5PeTiWnP69G7QF+T7bYNiMi3AVVn7YyvXk=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=AinBHFRS8GcKpLGHkRFzXp8HhCksmFeWSNp2/q3+fSChtoCOern7LcaM0kJftj/j2kNOWG4wWKvprVRS+FrDbk53/6ClWz4AWJTAyBIlL+iBPJmLTPeWcELlGgvE6jPG4BU3p7/Oo4RqHKSkNGvQH1y7+FP0Jf1TUE8A6BJ/DjI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=h-partners.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=h-partners.com header.i=@h-partners.com header.b=qtGgLdnx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.217 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=h-partners.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=h-partners.com header.i=@h-partners.com header.b="qtGgLdnx" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=h-partners.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=c8euFrWljbzxJTf2Hi5PPrkksISqAB89fxwgIGE6pIc=; b=qtGgLdnxNR9hGpajct9iXPJ8xOSpYkjPN2EVM6UslTaX//H3Lr5nny23c8CViKmR4bClbFZMz worHgsY9XYzRktnu6yZgZnBdSfkN8geyH/dQe2bEwTaBt+bHeZsuk3NpQcOueGv6d9HkppdKRTy YBZ8LYeAfwdNUjUsKgWp6lc= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.197]) by canpmsgout02.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4fVXRM4HdZzcZy0; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 19:56:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggemv705-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [10.3.19.32]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5093F40363; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 20:02:12 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemn100013.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.116) by dggemv705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 20:02:12 +0800 Received: from localhost (10.50.85.155) by kwepemn100013.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.116) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.36; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 20:02:11 +0800 Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2026 19:58:23 +0800 From: Long Li To: "Darrick J. Wong" CC: , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] xfs: factor out xfs_da3_node_entry_remove Message-ID: References: <20260309082752.2039861-1-leo.lilong@huawei.com> <20260309082752.2039861-3-leo.lilong@huawei.com> <20260309164229.GI6033@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="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260309164229.GI6033@frogsfrogsfrogs> X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems500001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.70) To kwepemn100013.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.116) On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:42:29AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > + __xfs_da3_node_remove(state->args->trans, state->args->dp, > > + state->args->geo, drop_blk); > > +} > > + > > +/* > > + * Remove an entry from a node at the specified index, this is an exported > > + * wrapper for removing entries from intermediate nodes. > > + */ > > +void > > +xfs_da3_node_entry_remove( > > This only applies to attr(ibute) structures, as evidenced by m_attr_geo > below. I think this ought to be named xfs_attr3_node_entry_remove. > Considering that xfs_da_btree.c implements functions related to xfs_da*, it might not be appropriate to place xfs_attr3_node_entry_remove here either. I think we could add an additional `struct xfs_da_geometry *geo` parameter to xfs_da3_node_entry_remove() and let it be specified externally, which would increase the function's generality. What do you think? Thanks, Long Li