[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zln4E5usaHTw68uO@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 09:17:23 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...weicloud.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
brauner@...nel.org, david@...morbit.com, chandanbabu@...nel.org,
jack@...e.cz, willy@...radead.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
chengzhihao1@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 5/8] xfs: refactor the truncating order
On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 08:27:32AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 06:31:36AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > + write_back = newsize > ip->i_disk_size && oldsize != ip->i_disk_size;
> >
> > Maybe need_writeback would be a better name for the variable? Also no
> > need to initialize it to false at declaration time if it is
> > unconditionally set here.
>
> This variable captures whether or not we need to write dirty file tail
> data because we're extending the ondisk EOF, right?
Yes.
> I don't really like long names like any good 1980s C programmer, but
> maybe we should name this something like "extending_ondisk_eof"?
Sure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists