On 4/7/14, 6:28 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 02:58:47PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> I did some mindless work during a plane ride. ;) >> >> If the granularity of these patches is just too much, I could certainly >> collapse them into fewer, bigger patches, but I figured that this would >> make them super-trivial to review. >> >> Most have no interesting commit messages aside from the subject, because >> the subject says it all. >> >> Compile-tested only, TBH. > > Looks good, except for the patch I specifically commented on. > > FWIW, this sort of cleanup will help reduce some of the register > pressure these code paths have, and that in turn will help reduce > stack usage, so if you can find more... yep I was thinking along those lines. I think this is all of them; more show up w/ GCC warnings but some are for ops that need the superset of args. I'll do one more pass to be sure there aren't any knock-on effects w/ these changes. Thanks, -Eric > Cheers, > > Dave. > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
