From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626F4C432BE for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 18:44:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28F6E6103A for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 18:44:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232326AbhHLSof (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2021 14:44:35 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:51766 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229905AbhHLSof (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2021 14:44:35 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E3FF61019; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 18:44:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1628793850; bh=cZGvzIKrBe2XpCfMFvZigtXPpLXTYl9+RPEzsoVnz2M=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=PLilM9jGjQJDTlriU7+WWZ+BoSeqBNmyc795mQl4xNmLe1bKidHCFK3tsFvWUuEjw 8BaCGAiwCHSIV+pVSkyQKQ8a8EVv/7EkivrZCzMssMTNaoV+/h1ZQWWf1XePYcZRLx b0oxvT1dMtIkMJ61HXC6N6aWX5z2weJaZ8AGwKsPez/MsvRxkngHgUP16RfxOk+rEG ztdk1f0ynUAlnbxCHW9RBr0/WSSLJ9iXiDb+oT9Sle4MQmJ6z2pIsqVgX3rMSqpcLD BVu8ToUjgzzv0+BYvzxQEoNduAVQ8t/YrRP1RmsAJIgF/iIJ25hWrRPZstvoRUfyNZ ooeEeAYTf9iNw== Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:09 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Pavel Reichl Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: remove the xfs_dinode_t typedef Message-ID: <20210812184409.GV3601443@magnolia> References: <20210812084343.27934-1-hch@lst.de> <20210812084343.27934-2-hch@lst.de> <6d28d82c-4113-3b74-c7bd-f430cf8fbfb3@redhat.com> <20210812171613.GT3601443@magnolia> <49db010a-b776-1fe8-4393-9d4a0753d6c8@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <49db010a-b776-1fe8-4393-9d4a0753d6c8@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 08:41:14PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote: > > On 8/12/21 7:16 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 11:31:31AM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote: > > > On 8/12/21 10:43 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > /* > > > > * If the size is unreasonable, then something > > > > @@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ xfs_iformat_extents( > > > > */ > > > > STATIC int > > > > xfs_iformat_btree( > > > > - xfs_inode_t *ip, > > > > - xfs_dinode_t *dip, > > > > + struct xfs_inode *ip, > > > > + struct xfs_dinode *dip, > > > > int whichfork) > > > Hi, > > > > > > since you are also removing xfs_inode_t I'd like to ask if it is a good idea > > [assuming you meant xfs_dinode_t here] > > Hmm, I'm sorry but I really did mean xfs_inode_t. > > Since the patch is named "remove the xfs_dinode_t  typedef" removing > xfs_dinode_t is quite expected. But removing xfs_inode_t not so much, hence > I'm asking if I should send a patch that removes completely xfs_inode_t as > is done for xfs_dinode_t by this very patch. > > I hope I'm not missing something :-). OH, you were referencing specifically the conversion of the xfs_inode_t in that hunk, not the general theme of removing xfs_dinode_t. Ok, no worries. :) --D > > > > > > > to send a separate patch removing all other instances of xfs_inode_t? (I'm > > > happy to do it). > > Seems like a reasonable thing to me. > > > Great, thanks! >