Re: [RFC][PATCH] bcache: ver 3

From: Kent Overstreet
Date: Fri Apr 23 2010 - 17:05:16 EST


On 04/23/2010 12:39 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:

+#define label(l, foo) if (0) { l: foo; }

I'd prefer that macro to go away.

I kind of like it, the way I use it it's shorthand for "return with x status"; it just makes return codes and exiting cleaner. But if you still hate it after you've read the functions where it's used, I can take it out.

+ return d[i / keys_per_page] + (i % keys_per_page);

That builds OK on i386? or does it need udivdi3() and/or umoddi3()?

If my understanding is correct, those are only needed for 64 bits, i indexes into a single node so 32 bits is plenty.


+}

+static int lookup_dev(struct cache_device *c, struct bio *bio)
+{
+ int dev;
+ for (dev = 0; dev< 256; dev++)

Use a macro for 256.. in lots of places.

Yes, definitely.

bcache: cannot allocate memory
"kmalloc error" sounds like kmalloc() had an internal error.

Agreed.

Need to document the sysfs interfaces:

Ok, I'll start on that.

+ err = "vmalloc error";

"cannot vmalloc memory";

Done.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/