Hello Josef, > > On 01/27/2014 04:59 AM, Wang Shilong wrote: >> We are really suffering from now ulist's implementation, some developers >> gave their try, and i just gave some of my ideas for things: >> >> 1. use list+rb_tree instead of arrary+rb_tree >> >> 2. add cur_list to iterator rather than ulist structure. >> >> 3. add seqnum into every node when they are added, this is >> used to do selfcheck when iterating node. >> >> I noticed Zach Brown's comments before, long term is to kick off >> ulist implementation, however, for now, we need at least avoid >> arrary from ulist. >> >> Cc: Liu Bo <[email protected]> >> Cc: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> >> Cc: Zach Brown <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <[email protected]> >> --- >> v2->v3: >> only do selfchecks with CONFIG_BTRFS_DEBUG enabled(Thanks to Josef!) >> update ulist's comments since they are out of date. >> v1->v2: >> add RFC title since this patch needs more reviews and comments. >> fix a used after free bug in ulist_fini(). > > I like the patch but it doesn't build since things like qgroups rely on > ulist->nnodes. You need to fix that in your patch and make sure this stuff > compiles. Thanks,
Sorry about if it did not compile. but I really compiled and tested it in my box, did you apply your qgroup patches? This patch is based on btrfs-next without your previous qgroup patches. Anyway i will double check it….. Thanks, Wang > > Josef > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > 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 [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
