[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141012185316.GQ7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:53:16 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
xfs@....sgi.com, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@...e.com>,
Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com,
reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org, Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.de>,
Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...nel.org>,
jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net, tytso@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/12 v2] Moving i_dquot out of struct inode
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 06:34:52AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I still very much disagree with the s_inode_fields indirection. Please
> find a patch below to remove it, and use a get_dquots super_block
> operation instead. This leads to less and better readable code,
> and serves 4 bytes in every inode in the system. Additionally the
> indirection could easily be optimized away by directly passing the
> dquot array in various functions, but for now I'd like to keep it
> simple.
Indeed. This "array of offsets" approach is asking for trouble. Please,
don't go there - playing that way with type safety is a bad idea.
--
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