From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:40543 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935538AbdADIuw (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jan 2017 03:50:52 -0500 Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:50:50 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] xfs: fix bogus minleft manipulations Message-ID: <20170104085050.GA17788@lst.de> References: <1481644767-9098-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1481644767-9098-2-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20161215220938.GV4219@dastard> <20161216082044.GB32288@lst.de> <20170104063239.GF14031@birch.djwong.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170104063239.GF14031@birch.djwong.org> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Dave Chinner , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, eguan@redhat.com > > Yes. And I actually had that in a previous iteration, and it got > > dropped at some point. > > I see the diff hunk in question hasn't changed in the v2 patchset... > Did Dave's suggestion not work? We don't need it anymore. The previous iteration set minleft to the worst case indirect blocks for the requested extent length. This series instead sticks to the old minleft value for just a single extent allocation and thus doesn't need the fallback as the minleft value can't get any smaller.