Hi, On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:15:43 +0800, Li Hong <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi KONISHI Ryusuke, > > Three new patches based on nilfs2/for-next branch. New code has been built and > loaded successfully, and also passed a light-weight reads and writes test. > > Thanks, > Li Hong
Ok, I'll look into each of them. > ---------------------------- cut here -------------------------- > > From 2c622d0f59782321204bf1fde7eea4a593cc6b65 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Li Hong <[email protected]> > Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:57:11 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH 1/3] nilfs2: remove nilfs_segctor_init() in segment.c > > There are only two lines of code in nilfs_segctor_init(). From a logic design > view, the first line 'sci->sc_seq_done = sci->sc_seq_request;' should be put > in > nilfs_segctor_new(). Even in nilfs_segctor_new(), this initialization is > needless because sci is kzalloc-ed. So nilfs_segctor_init() is only a wrap > call > to nilfs_segctor_start_thread(). This removes an indirect call overhead. > > Signed-off-by: Li Hong <[email protected]> Looks no problem. The reason why nilfs_segctor_init is present in that manner is historical (just for your information. You don't have to mention this reason). I think you don't have to mention the indirect call overhead because it's only triggered in the level of mount/unmount/remount and gcc will inline it in the caller. Thanks, Ryusuke Konishi > --- > fs/nilfs2/segment.c | 9 +-------- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > index f235fc0..514620d 100644 > --- a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > +++ b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > @@ -2684,13 +2684,6 @@ static void nilfs_segctor_kill_thread(struct > nilfs_sc_info *sci) > } > } > > -static int nilfs_segctor_init(struct nilfs_sc_info *sci) > -{ > - sci->sc_seq_done = sci->sc_seq_request; > - > - return nilfs_segctor_start_thread(sci); > -} > - > /* > * Setup & clean-up functions > */ > @@ -2814,7 +2807,7 @@ int nilfs_attach_segment_constructor(struct > nilfs_sb_info *sbi) > return -ENOMEM; > > nilfs_attach_writer(nilfs, sbi); > - err = nilfs_segctor_init(NILFS_SC(sbi)); > + err = nilfs_segctor_start_thread(NILFS_SC(sbi)); > if (err) { > nilfs_detach_writer(nilfs, sbi); > kfree(sbi->s_sc_info); > -- > 1.6.3.3 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" 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-nilfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
