On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:09:16AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Maybe those should move to xfs_item_ops as they operate on a "live" > xfs_log_item? (they'd need to grow names clearly related to recovery > of course). In fact except for slightly different calling convention > ->cancel_intent already seems to be identical to ->abort_intent in > xfs_item_ops, so that would be one off the list. Actually abort_intent is in xfs_defer_op_type, so we can't share it easily. But at least in another step we could refactor them to have the same prototype :)
