On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 06:48:51AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 09:45:15PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > The patch itself looks fine, although I don't really see the point in
> > > the xfsprogs-only xfs_buf_set_daddr (including the current two callers).
> >
> > Eh, yeah. Want me to resend with those bits cut out?
>
> As long as the helper is around there's probably no reason not to use
> it. Removing it would probably pair pretty well with passing a daddr
> to xfs_get_buf_uncached. Or maybe killing xfs_{get,read}_buf_uncached
> entirely in favor of just using xfs_buf_oneshot more..
<nod> I think I'd rather rid of it entirely and fix the _uncached API to
take a daddr. It's not like we can't pass in DADDR_NULL if we *really*
don't know where it's going.
--D
