[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BD20B7E.2070201@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 13:05:02 -0800
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] bcache: ver 3
On 04/23/2010 12:39 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> +#define label(l, foo) if (0) { l: foo; }
>
> I'd prefer that macro to go away.
I kind of like it, the way I use it it's shorthand for "return with x status";
it just makes return codes and exiting cleaner. But if you still hate it after
you've read the functions where it's used, I can take it out.
>> + return d[i / keys_per_page] + (i % keys_per_page);
>
> That builds OK on i386? or does it need udivdi3() and/or umoddi3()?
If my understanding is correct, those are only needed for 64 bits, i indexes
into a single node so 32 bits is plenty.
>
>> +}
>
>> +static int lookup_dev(struct cache_device *c, struct bio *bio)
>> +{
>> + int dev;
>> + for (dev = 0; dev< 256; dev++)
>
> Use a macro for 256.. in lots of places.
Yes, definitely.
> bcache: cannot allocate memory
> "kmalloc error" sounds like kmalloc() had an internal error.
Agreed.
> Need to document the sysfs interfaces:
Ok, I'll start on that.
>> + err = "vmalloc error";
>
> "cannot vmalloc memory";
Done.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists