On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:17:45AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 07:25:43PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > This is a cleaned up version of the original RFC I posted here: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20200623095015.1934171-1-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > The original description is preserved below for quick reference, > > I'll just walk though the changes in this version: > > > > - rebased on current TOT and xfs/for-next > > - split up into many smaller patches > > - includes Xiang's single unlinked list bucket modification > > - uses a list_head for the in memory double unlinked inode list > > rather than aginos and lockless inode lookups > > - much simpler as it doesn't need to look up inodes from agino > > values > > - iunlink log item changed to take an xfs_inode pointer rather than > > an imap and agino values > > - a handful of small cleanups that breaking up into small patches > > allowed. > > Two questions: How does this patchset intersect with the other one that > changes the iunlink series? I guess the v4 of that series (when it > appears) is intended to be applied directly after this one? (confirmed from IRC) Yeah, I looked through this patchset these days and sent out another rebased version and yes it can be applied directly instead. also put a link here: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200818133015.25398-1-hsiangkao@xxxxxxxxxx Sorry for that I shouldn't use --in-reply-to as deep as this way. Thanks, Gao Xiang
