[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <20080605205830.GE2961@webber.adilger.int>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:58:30 -0600
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, cmm@...ibm.com, sandeen@...hat.com,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] ext4: Use inode preallocation with -o noextents
On Jun 06, 2008 00:42 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 12:28:30PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > I don't necessarily agree that meta should be implied by inode != NULL.
> > We do want to cluster metadata allocations for a single inode if possible,
> > so keeping the inode information is useful. We may want to keep a separate
> > "metadata goal block" from the "data goal block" in the inode...
> >
> > That said, it seems you still have a "meta" parameter here? I always hate
> > having an int for a boolean, and we may as well make this a "flags" so
> > that when we want to improve it later we don't need to rename it and change
> > all of the "1" parameters to "EXT4_META_BLOCK". Do it right the first time.
> >
>
> how about ?
>
> +#defin EXT4_META_BLOCK 0x1
> @@ -1950,7 +1952,7 @@ static ext4_fsblk_t do_blk_alloc(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
> - if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !meta)
> + if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !(flags & EXT4_META_BLOCK))
I'm fine with this.
> + return do_blk_alloc(handle, inode, 0, goal, &count,
> + errp, EXT4_META_BLOCK);
Please follow the normal CodingStyle.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists