[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150922130933.GD12815@twin.jikos.cz>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:09:33 +0200
From: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To: Alexandru Moise <00moses.alexander00@...il.com>
Cc: clm@...com, jbacik@...com, dsterba@...e.com,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
holger.hoffstaette@...glemail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs: avoid passing int param to start_transaction
which takes u64
On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 06:47:20PM +0000, Alexandru Moise wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Moise <00moses.alexander00@...il.com>
> ---
> v2: Forgot to add transaction.h when I made the commit, many thanks
> Holger for pointing it out.
>
> fs/btrfs/transaction.c | 2 +-
> fs/btrfs/transaction.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c
> index 8f259b3..8a83acd 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c
> @@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ reserve_fail:
> }
>
> struct btrfs_trans_handle *btrfs_start_transaction(struct btrfs_root *root,
> - int num_items)
> + u64 num_items)
I think it's better to do it the other way around, ie. let all the
equivalents of 'num_items' be an int. We know that this is a small
number, using u64 for that is an overkill. As the number is always
positive, please make it 'unsigned'.
--
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