On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 02:23:49PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Because we repeat exactly the same code to get the remote attribute > value after both calls to xfs_attr3_leaf_getvalue() if it's a remote > attr. Just do it in xfs_attr3_leaf_getvalue() so the callers don't > have to care about it. It also refactors xfs_attr3_leaf_getvalue to be more readable first. Which confused the heck out of me when reading the code. I'd prefer that to be split into a prep patch, but on its own both changes look good to me, so: Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
