On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 09:54:08AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 10:06:15AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > Seems Ok, but not sure I see the point personally. Rather than a single > > helper with flags, we have multiple helpers, some of which still mix > > deltas via an incrementally harder to read boolean param. This seems > > sort of arbitrary to me. Is this to support some future work? > > I just find these multiplexers that have no common logic very confusing. > > And yes, I also have some changes to share more logic between the > delalloc vs non-delalloc block accounting. > I'm not sure what you mean by no common logic. The original trans_mod_sb() is basically a big switch statement for modifying the appropriate transaction delta associated with a superblock field. That seems logical to me. Just to be clear, I don't really feel strongly about this one way or the other. I don't object and I don't think it makes anything worse, and it's less of a change if half this stuff goes away anyways by changing how the sb is logged. But I also think sometimes code seems more clear moreso because we go through the process of refactoring it (i.e. familiarity bias) over what the code ultimately looks like. *shrug* This is all subjective, I'm sure there are other opinions. Brian
