Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:11:24 -0700 (PDT) | From | Dave Kleikamp <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] jfs: neatening |
| |
On 06/04/2013 06:39 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > The second patch is speculative and maybe not necessary. > > Is a 3KB reduction in object size when embedded and !CONFIG_PRINTK worth it?
I'm pushing the first patch to linux-next. I haven't made up my mind about the second. I don't really consider jfs to be the filesystem of choice for a small embedded system. Maybe something like a dvr, but then it wouldn't be a big factor.
Thanks Shagggy
> Joe Perches (2): > jfs: Update jfs_error > jfs: Reduce object size when CONFIG_PRINTK=n > > fs/jfs/jfs_dmap.c | 70 +++++++++++++++++++------------------------------ > fs/jfs/jfs_dtree.c | 37 +++++++++++++------------- > fs/jfs/jfs_extent.c | 2 +- > fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------- > fs/jfs/jfs_metapage.c | 5 ++-- > fs/jfs/jfs_superblock.h | 17 +++++++++++- > fs/jfs/jfs_txnmgr.c | 2 +- > fs/jfs/jfs_xtree.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- > fs/jfs/namei.c | 2 +- > fs/jfs/resize.c | 2 +- > fs/jfs/super.c | 24 ++++++++++------- > fs/jfs/xattr.c | 4 +-- > 12 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 154 deletions(-) >
| |