Hi Rob,
okey dokey. I can change it that will clean the code up :)
Lets wait on it a bit. I havent done a whole lot of testing on this
though..
Thanks,
Murali

> can you push the HAVE_IGET5_LOCKED and HAVE_IGET4 tests down lower?
>
> what i mean is instead of:
>
> +#if defined(HAVE_IGET5_LOCKED) || defined(HAVE_IGET4)
> +    return PVFS2_SB(inode->i_sb)->root_handle == PVFS2_I(inode)->refn.handle;
> +#else
> +    return PVFS2_SB(inode->i_sb)->root_handle == 
> pvfs2_ino_to_handle(inode->i_ino);
>
> would it make sense to move the macro tests to inside PVFS2_I ?  or
> would that cause larger problems with the code?
>
> ==rob
>
> --
> Rob Latham
> Mathematics and Computer Science Division    A215 0178 EA2D B059 8CDF
> Argonne National Labs, IL USA                B29D F333 664A 4280 315B
>
>
_______________________________________________
PVFS2-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers

Reply via email to