On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:21:30AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 04:42:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > --- > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 2 +- > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_defer.c | 4 ++-- > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_defer.h | 2 +- > > 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c > > index c09c16b1ad3b..24eba36ef818 100644 > > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c > > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c > > @@ -6452,7 +6452,7 @@ __xfs_bmap_add( > > bi->bi_whichfork = whichfork; > > bi->bi_bmap = *bmap; > > > > - error = xfs_defer_join(dfops, bi->bi_owner); > > + error = xfs_defer_join_inode(dfops, bi->bi_owner); > > /me wonders if this should be named xfs_defer_ijoin to be more > consistent with xfs_trans_ijoin, or if we should rename the other one to > xfs_trans_join_inode instead? Sure. I'll resend with the __ prefix removed from __xfs_trans_roll and this renamed to _ijoin. Should I also rename xfs_trans_roll_inode to xfs_trans_roll_ijoin? -- 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
