On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:38:25AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The incore inode walk code passes a flags argument and a pointer from
> > the xfs_inode_ag_iterator caller all the way to the iteration function.
> > We can reduce the function complexity by passing flags through the
> > private pointer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c | 38 ++++++++++++++------------------------
> > fs/xfs/xfs_icache.h | 4 ++--
> > fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++--------
> > 3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > index e716b19879c6..87b98bfdf27d 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > @@ -790,9 +790,7 @@ STATIC int
> > xfs_inode_ag_walk(
> > struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > struct xfs_perag *pag,
> > - int (*execute)(struct xfs_inode *ip, int flags,
> > - void *args),
> > - int flags,
> > + int (*execute)(struct xfs_inode *ip, void *args),
> > void *args,
> > int tag,
> > int iter_flags)
> > @@ -868,7 +866,7 @@ xfs_inode_ag_walk(
> > if ((iter_flags & XFS_AGITER_INEW_WAIT) &&
> > xfs_iflags_test(batch[i], XFS_INEW))
> > xfs_inew_wait(batch[i]);
> > - error = execute(batch[i], flags, args);
> > + error = execute(batch[i], args);
> > xfs_irele(batch[i]);
> > if (error == -EAGAIN) {
> > skipped++;
> > @@ -972,9 +970,7 @@ int
> > xfs_inode_ag_iterator(
> > struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > int iter_flags,
> > - int (*execute)(struct xfs_inode *ip, int flags,
> > - void *args),
> > - int flags,
> > + int (*execute)(struct xfs_inode *ip, void *args),
> > void *args,
> > int tag)
> > {
> > @@ -986,7 +982,7 @@ xfs_inode_ag_iterator(
> > ag = 0;
> > while ((pag = xfs_ici_walk_get_perag(mp, ag, tag))) {
> > ag = pag->pag_agno + 1;
> > - error = xfs_inode_ag_walk(mp, pag, execute, flags, args, tag,
> > + error = xfs_inode_ag_walk(mp, pag, execute, args, tag,
> > iter_flags);
> > xfs_perag_put(pag);
> > if (error) {
> > @@ -1443,12 +1439,14 @@ xfs_inode_match_id_union(
> > STATIC int
> > xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
> > struct xfs_inode *ip,
> > - int flags,
> > void *args)
> > {
> > - int ret = 0;
> > - struct xfs_eofblocks *eofb = args;
> > - int match;
> > + struct xfs_eofblocks *eofb = args;
> > + bool wait;
> > + int match;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + wait = (eofb && (eofb->eof_flags & XFS_EOF_FLAGS_SYNC));
>
> No need for the outer braces.
Fixed.
> > @@ -1484,7 +1481,7 @@ xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
> > * scanner moving and revisit the inode in a subsequent pass.
> > */
> > if (!xfs_ilock_nowait(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL)) {
> > - if (flags & SYNC_WAIT)
> > + if (wait)
> > ret = -EAGAIN;
> > return ret;
>
> Just me, but I'd prefer an explicit:
>
> if (wait)
> return -EAGAIN;
> return 0;
>
> here. Not really new in this patch, but if you touch this area anyway..
How about 'return wait ? -EAGAIN : 0;' ?
> > index a9460bdcca87..571ecb17b3bf 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c
> > @@ -726,12 +726,17 @@ xfs_qm_scall_getquota_next(
> > return error;
> > }
> >
> > +struct xfs_dqrele {
> > + uint flags;
> > +};
>
> > + struct xfs_dqrele dqr = {
> > + .flags = flags,
> > + };
>
> Instead of a new structure we could just take the address of flags and
> pass that to simplify the code a bit.
Fixed.
--D
