On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 10:36:28AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 05:50:27PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > I would have called it xfs_busy_extent.h, but given how far you are with > > the series it's really not worth bike sheeding about this detail. > > I'm ambivalent, really. I used extent_busy to match the > xfs_extfree_item.c naming. i.e. extent specific manipulations are in > xfs_ext* namespace. It's pretty simple to change (a couple of search > and replace), so if you'd prefer busy_extent I can change it pretty > quickly... Actually, I just found a problem with this patch - xfs_alloc_busy_trim is not properly handled - so I've got to respin it. I'll change it all to busy_extent while I'm at it... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
