On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 11:31:31AM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote: > > On 8/12/21 10:43 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > /* > > * If the size is unreasonable, then something > > @@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ xfs_iformat_extents( > > */ > > STATIC int > > xfs_iformat_btree( > > - xfs_inode_t *ip, > > - xfs_dinode_t *dip, > > + struct xfs_inode *ip, > > + struct xfs_dinode *dip, > > int whichfork) > > Hi, > > since you are also removing xfs_inode_t I'd like to ask if it is a good idea [assuming you meant xfs_dinode_t here] > to send a separate patch removing all other instances of xfs_inode_t? (I'm > happy to do it). Seems like a reasonable thing to me. --D > > Patch applies, builds and LGTM. > > Reviewed-by: Pavel Reichl <preichl@xxxxxxxxxx> >
