At 03/15/2017 10:38 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 02:32:04PM -0600, ednadol...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Edmund Nadolski <enadol...@suse.com>
Define the SEQ_NONE macro to replace (u64)-1 in places where said
value triggers a special-case ref search behavior.
index 9c41fba..20915a6 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/backref.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/backref.h
@@ -23,6 +23,8 @@
#include "ulist.h"
#include "extent_io.h"
+#define SEQ_NONE ((u64)-1)
The naming of SEQ_NONE sounds not that good to me.
The (u64)-1 is to to info the backref walker to only search current
root, and no need to worry about delayed_refs, since the caller (qgroup)
will ensure that no delayed_ref will exist.
While the name SEQ_NONE seems a little like to 0, which is far from the
original meaning.
What about SEQ_FINAL or SEQ_LAST?
Since the timing we use (u64)-1 is just before switching commit roots,
it would be better for the naming to indicate that.
Thanks,
Qu
Can you please move the definition to ctree.h, near line 660, where
seq_list and SEQ_LIST_INIT are defined, so thay're all grouped together?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
