On Wednesday 19 August 2020 3:33:07 AM IST Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 01:38:31PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> > Moving an extent to data fork can cause a sub-interval of an existing
> > extent to be unmapped. This will increase extent count by 1. Mapping in
> > the new extent can increase the extent count by 1 again i.e.
> > | Old extent | New extent | Old extent |
> > Hence number of extents increases by 2.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h | 10 +++++++++-
> > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c | 6 ++++++
> > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h
> > index 63f83a13e0a8..d750bdff17c9 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h
> > @@ -76,7 +76,15 @@ struct xfs_ifork {
> > * increase by 1.
> > */
> > #define XFS_IEXT_INSERT_HOLE_CNT 1
> > -
> > +/*
> > + * Moving an extent to data fork can cause a sub-interval of an
> > + * existing extent to be unmapped. This will increase extent count by
> > + * 1. Mapping in the new extent can increase the extent count by 1
> > + * again i.e.
> > + * | Old extent | New extent | Old extent |
>
> This comment is a little oddly formatted, mostly because my brain
> thought that the line starting with "1. Mapping" was a numbered bullet
> list. If you reflow the comment further outward, you can get it to look
> like this:
>
> /*
> * Moving an extent to data fork can cause a sub-interval of an existing
> * extent to be unmapped, increasing extent count by 1. Mapping in the
> * new extent can also increase the extent count by 1:
> * | Old extent | New extent | Old extent |
> * Hence number of extents increases by 2.
> */
> #define XFS_IEXT_REFLINK_END_COW_CNT 2
>
Sure. I will fix up all the comments in the patchset to extend upto 80
columns.
--
chandan
