On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:07:53PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > Not quite sure I follow the last bit, but I don't necessarily think the > > whole thing has to be boxed into a helper to clean it up. E.g., I'd do > > something like the appended diff (compile tested only). > > > > ... and if the function signature is really an issue, trade off idx & > prev for a conditional base preallocation size (applies on top of the > previous diff): These two patches together look pretty reasonable. I'll retest with it include and will pick it up for the next version if it works. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
