Re: [PATCH 05/18] fs: inode split IO and LRU lists

[Dave Chinner]

On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:16:17AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > -	struct list_head	i_list;		/* backing dev IO list */
> > +	struct list_head	i_io;		/* backing dev IO list */
> > +	struct list_head	i_lru;		/* backing dev IO list */
> 
> a) that pair of comments would be disqualified in IOCCC ;-)

Oops.

> b) have a pity on folks who will have to talk about the code.  I mean,
> how would you say that?  Ai-Ai-Oh?

Fair call. How about i_wb_list?

> > +extern struct percpu_counter nr_inodes;
> > +extern struct percpu_counter nr_inodes_unused;
> 
> Ehh...  At least take that to fs/internal.h.  Preferably don't expose at
> all.

That get's cleaned up later with helpers. As Christoph suggested, I need
to move the helpers forward in the series.

> 
> > -				list_del(&inode->i_list);
> > -				list_add(&inode->i_list, &bdi->wb.b_dirty);
> > +				list_del(&inode->i_io);
> > +				list_add(&inode->i_io, &bdi->wb.b_dirty);
> 
> list_move()?  Ditto for the next few.  And, while that's not directed
> at you, this kind of loops is Not Nice(tm)...

Not a great fan of them myself, but Christoph pointed out that the
inode <-> bdi fix of his that just landed in mainline should remove
the need for these loops.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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/