From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755154Ab1J0JNg (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2011 05:13:36 -0400 Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:33941 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754792Ab1J0JNf (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2011 05:13:35 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 05:13:30 -0400 From: "Ted Ts'o" To: Jan Kara Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: fs: jdb/jbd2: Put identical code in a common header Message-ID: <20111027091330.GA31921@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Ts'o , Jan Kara , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Thomas Gleixner References: <20111018204031.GE4599@quack.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111018204031.GE4599@quack.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on test.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:40:31PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 05-10-11 13:29:29, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > The state bits and the lock functions of jbd and jbd2 are > > identical. Share them. > Hum, Ted, I don't think this got picked up. What's your opinion? It seems reasonable to me. Factoring out common code is a good though, although inline functions won't save any text space and since this part of the jbd header files are rarely changed, so the maintainability advantages are reduced. I'll take the patch and include it in the ext4 tree. - Ted