Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753234AbYLZCal (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 21:30:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752682AbYLZCaJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 21:30:09 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:47138 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752565AbYLZCaH (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 21:30:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 18:29:41 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Mark Fasheh Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, joel.becker@oracle.com, jack@suse.cz Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/56] ocfs2: Implementation of local and global quota file handling Message-Id: <20081225182941.7fdadc83.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20081225002923.GA17410@wotan.suse.de> References: <1229982517-3455-1-git-send-email-mfasheh@suse.com> <1229982517-3455-24-git-send-email-mfasheh@suse.com> <20081222161138.779cbffa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081225002923.GA17410@wotan.suse.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1372 Lines: 38 On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 16:29:23 -0800 Mark Fasheh wrote: > > > > put_bh() is more efficient and modern, in the case where bh is known to > > not be NULL. > > How about __brelse()? Won't we lose the ref counting check if we go straight > to put_bh()? > That would work, if you value the debug check. > > ... > > > > +/* Write to quotafile (we know the transaction is already started and has > > > + * enough credits) */ > > > +ssize_t ocfs2_quota_write(struct super_block *sb, int type, > > > + const char *data, size_t len, loff_t off) > > > +{ > > > + struct mem_dqinfo *info = sb_dqinfo(sb, type); > > > + struct ocfs2_mem_dqinfo *oinfo = info->dqi_priv; > > > + struct inode *gqinode = oinfo->dqi_gqinode; > > > + int offset = off & (sb->s_blocksize - 1); > > > + sector_t blk = off >> sb->s_blocksize_bits; > > > > does ocfs2 attempt to support CONFIG_LBD=n? > > It should... What's the problem here? Idle curiosity. I noticed that the above expression could result in truncation when writing a 64-bit value into a 32-bit one, which makes one wonder whether this all works and is tested, etc. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/