On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 06:53:03PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:35:37PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > A comment would be nice here just so the purpose of the logic is clear > > > at a glance. E.g: > > > > > > /* > > > * COW fork blocks can overlap data fork blocks even if the > > > * blocks aren't shared. COW I/O always takes precedent, so we > > > * must always check for overlap on reflink inodes unless the > > > * mapping is already COW. > > > */ > > > > > > With something like that, this now looks pretty good to me: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I concur, it would help to have a comment to remind everyone that we > > sometimes upgrade to a cow write even when it's not strictly required. > > :) > > > > With that comment added in, > > Do you just want to throw it after the series? Or should I or Brian > resend it on top of the series? I just stuck it in the patch and had it follow the code in the subsequent reorganizations. Testing is running now... --D -- 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
