On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:11:24AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 05:58:30PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:57:29PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > XFS_MAXIOFFSET() is just a simple macro that resolves to > > > mp->m_maxioffset. It doesn't need to exist, and it just makes the > > > code unnecessarily loud and shouty. > > > > > > Make it quiet and easy to read. > > > > Do we actually need to keep around a value in our superblock? > > s_maxbytes in the VFS superblock already does this, and it seems like > > at least our checks in the read path are superflous. Actually, I can't find where the read path checks against s_maxbytes. It's not in generic_segment_check(), and there appears to be no other range checks in the VFS. So I think that the check we have in xfs_file_aio_read needs to remain.... > Ah, we do indeed keep the same value in s_maxbytes - that's one step > removed from m_maxioffset because it uses the same function to > calculate it, and they are done a long way apart. Ok, it looks like > I've got a couple more patches to write to finish off this cleanup. Still, we can now replace the copy-n-paste code in xfs_file_aio_read() with a call to generic_segment_check() seeing as it returns a sum of the iovec length now, and still kill m_maxioffset.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
