> > This allows us to trim out half of btrfs_init_delayed_node() which > > is now reduntant. > > It's redundant if kmem_cache_zalloc is used, but you haven't > documented that doing so is now required. For all of these changes > you've posted, if they're to be accepted, I'd really prefer to set up > the slab with a constructor instead. Then we don't need to worry > about such guarantees. The object returned via kmem_cache_alloc will > always be properly initialized. Well I wouldn't say it's *required* just makes this particular piece of code neater, since we memset-zero the node's inode_item _anyways_. I like the constructor idea though, do you suggest I should invest in that idea? > > This makes assumptions about atomic_t and what atomic_set does that > aren't guaranteed to be true. When accessors/mutators are part of the > API they should be used. > > - -Jeff You're right, taking out that atomic_set was really stupid. I'll resent the patch with a proper explanation in the commit message and put the atomic_set back. Unless you feel that the change is rather pointless, I'll gladly back off :-). Regards, Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
