On 09/05/2013 08:28 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 12:19:12PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
>> On 09/04/2013 10:54 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 02:25:07PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
...
>>
>> I think I'm parsing you after having another look at the code.
>> xfs_inobt_lookup() remains as is and is potentially used from
>> xfs_inobt_insert(). xfs_inobt_insert_rec() is introduced to set the
>> cursor fields and do the insert and is used here and from
>> xfs_inobt_insert().
>
> Effectively. xfs_inobt_insert() becomes:
>
> for (each inode chunk) {
> xfs_inobt_lookup(cur, startino)
> xfs_inobt_insert_rec(cur, startino, free, free_count)
> }
>
> And this code becomes:
>
> xfs_inobt_lookup(cur, startino);
> if (!found) {
> if (free_count == 1)
> xfs_inobt_insert_rec(cur, startino, free, free_count)
> else
> CORRUPTION
> goto out;
> }
>
>> At that point, this looks close to xfs_inobt_insert(), but I think using
>> that here would introduce a duplicate lookup.
>
> Yes, it would. I think just using helpers like this is sufficient
> for the two different cases, especially as xfs_inobt_insert() needs
> to be able to handle multiple chunk insertion and we don't have that
> here...
>
Ok, that was my thinking as well.
>> Regardless, we'll see what
>> the whole thing looks like at that point. Thanks for the reviews. :)
>
> No worries. BTW, can you post your rudimentary userspace support so
> we can run tests that use this code, too?
>
Sure. My xfsprogs branch currently is the application of a slightly
older version of this set (pre-cleanups I made to make this post-worthy)
with some hacks to make it apply/compile and a few other patches on top
of that for mkfs, xfs_db and xfs_repair to work through some basic
things I ran into when running xfstests.
Would you prefer I drop the whole thing on the list?
Brian
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
