On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:26:01AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > IMO, patches 1-3 stand on their own as cleanup/refactor patches, > regardless of whether we want the actual speculative preallocation patch > (in current form or at all). xfs_reflink_reserve_cow() is mostly a > copy&paste of _iomap_begin_delay() operating on the cow fork rather than > the data fork, so technically we really shouldn't have a need for a > feature specific helper. Duplication aside, I also find the code a bit > confusing to follow in that we have to traverse through several > functions in "do nothing" cases such as non-shared blocks of a reflinked > file. I'm usually not a fan of refactor patches that adds lots of new code without adding functionality. In terms of readability I'm obviously biasses having written a lot of the code, but I find the new code much harder to read. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
