On 11/06/2012 11:41 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 11/06/12 08:50, Brian Foster wrote: >> Support inode ID filtering in the eofblocks scan. The caller must >> set the associated XFS_EOF_FLAGS_*ID bit and ID field. >> >> Signed-off-by: Brian Foster<bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- > > turn 0; >> >> + if (eofb&& > > vvvvvvv >> + (eofb->eof_flags& (XFS_EOF_FLAGS_UID|XFS_EOF_FLAGS_GID| >> + XFS_EOF_FLAGS_PRID))&& > ^^^^^^ > Not a big deal but wouldn't xfs_inode_match_id() also check these flags? > Yes it does, but at this point in the patch xfs_inode_match_id() is implemented in an opt-in way that would alter the codepath (i.e., it would always return 0 if no ID flags were specified and skip every inode). I thought about defining another directive to combine the ID flags and clean that up a bit, but as you probably noticed, the following patch reimplements xfs_inode_match_id() such that it opts-out inodes and allows this check in xfs_inode_free_eofblocks() to go away. Brian >> + !xfs_inode_match_id(ip, eofb)) >> + return 0; >> + > > > Consider this > > Reviewed-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
