On Tue 02-02-10 19:07:55, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Tue 02-02-10 17:07:49, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> >> - remove hardcoded USRQUOTA/GRPQUOTA flags
> >> - convert int to bool for appropriate functions
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> > ...
> >> -static inline int sb_any_quota_suspended(struct super_block *sb)
> >> +static inline unsigned sb_any_quota_suspended(struct super_block *sb)
> >> {
> >> - return sb_has_quota_suspended(sb, USRQUOTA) ||
> >> - sb_has_quota_suspended(sb, GRPQUOTA);
> >> + unsigned type, tmsk = 0;
> >> + for (type = 0; type < MAXQUOTAS; type++)
> >> + tmsk |= sb_has_quota_suspended(sb, type) << type;
> >> + return tmsk;
> >> }
> > Any particular reason for returning the mask instead of a simple bool?
> > Are you going to use the mask in future?
> >
> Actually i've not use this yet, but it is reasonable to
> pass this mask in some places for example:
> vfs_dq_init() {
> mask = sb_any_quota_active(inode->sb)
> dq_op->initialize(inode, mask)
> }
> in order to avoid checks for the same value inside ->initialize()
OK, but we usually have to recheck with dqptr_sem held anyway
to make the check reliable... The sb_any_quota_* checks are there usually
to optimize the common case where no quota is enabled on the filesystem.
But it's not a big deal either way... I was just curious...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
