From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com (szxga07-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FE96132807; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 09:49:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.35 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713347387; cv=none; b=hY/Y0p/hCstqfX/2kReFzM865ooyM2oqrDp/rvlweDJuEfHQIsYl7L7zqolx4vSNJfHPlbYN2UdBLxCLtYXWpNyQVdlVLhyWru6SwhjS4jn8dN1OIiBTnLCxegGu9vkAyaQ284KadP+QgTuVm7924gBDj27yuLKq8mEfBywu4rU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713347387; c=relaxed/simple; bh=plntP41Bw89KrCuZnohgRitGb2UlB4IujMdB/ywEKbg=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=IxM8NLRUI7O1zsEFM8sShvGQywTB/mQTr9NEfpgDgh464RMbvg53IMDL1ZSlXrPpqXpOsxxMQY2P0yRoU8IDxIUMEv9KgMjb0FXpInQDt1fGnydVpHVRR+GbDNEas8u3i9XDr1mieU+eigtlv+LmLO+kKEplajxF2FnXGKOvgUM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.35 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.88.214]) by szxga07-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4VKGJh1Z6pz1RDCb; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:46:44 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpeml500022.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.66]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 970BE1A016C; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:49:42 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.111.104] (10.67.111.104) by dggpeml500022.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:49:42 +0800 Message-ID: <72e1b795-7219-41dd-83f2-10a3be2680b2@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:49:41 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcachefs: Align the display format of `btrees/inodes/keys` Content-Language: en-US To: Youling Tang , Kent Overstreet CC: , , Youling Tang References: <20240417015448.84294-1-youling.tang@linux.dev> <66ecea56-e4d3-4241-a1dc-378d70555321@linux.dev> <29d5ea19-21b5-4076-9acc-8286a050c33f@huawei.com> <63d9540f-61bc-4eba-819c-c05d2e486bdb@linux.dev> From: Hongbo Li In-Reply-To: <63d9540f-61bc-4eba-819c-c05d2e486bdb@linux.dev> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To dggpeml500022.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.66) On 2024/4/17 13:51, Youling Tang wrote: > Hi, Kent & Hongbo > On 17/04/2024 11:21, Hongbo Li wrote: >> >> >> On 2024/4/17 11:16, Hongbo Li wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2024/4/17 10:59, Kent Overstreet wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:50:10AM +0800, Youling Tang wrote: >>>>> Hi, Kent >>>>> On 17/04/2024 10:20, Kent Overstreet wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 09:54:48AM +0800, Youling Tang wrote: >>>>>>> From: Youling Tang >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Before patch: >>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>    #cat btrees/inodes/keys >>>>>>>    u64s 17 type inode_v3 0:4096:U32_MAX len 0 ver 0: mode=40755 >>>>>>>      flags= (16300000) >>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>> >>>>>>> After patch: >>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>    #cat btrees/inodes/keys >>>>>>>    u64s 17 type inode_v3 0:4096:U32_MAX len 0 ver 0: >>>>>>>      mode=40755 >>>>>>>      flags= (16300000) >>> The flags also with the space after "=". Is it reseonable? >> Sorry, I misspell. I mean whether it is reasonable. >>>>>> This would print a newline for keys that don't have a value... >>>>> The original intention was to make the display of the printed >>>>> content in >>>>> '__bch2_inode_unpacked_to_text ()' consistent, without considering >>>>> other >>>>> callbacks. >>>>> >>>>> Or just modify it in the following way? >>>> >>>> Yeah, that's better >>>> >>>> Do it off my master branch though, there's some printbuf >>>> imprevements in >>>> there. >>>> >>>> https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs.git > I will make the following changes based on the master branch, > > --- a/fs/bcachefs/inode.c > > +++ b/fs/bcachefs/inode.c > @@ -534,12 +534,13 @@ int bch2_inode_v3_invalid(struct bch_fs *c, struct > bkey_s_c k, >  static void __bch2_inode_unpacked_to_text(struct printbuf *out, >                                           struct bch_inode_unpacked > *inode) >  { > +       prt_printf(out, "\n"); >         printbuf_indent_add(out, 2); >         prt_printf(out, "mode=%o\n", inode->bi_mode); > >         prt_str(out, "flags="); >         prt_bitflags(out, bch2_inode_flag_strs, inode->bi_flags & ((1U > << 20) - 1)); > -       prt_printf(out, " (%x)\n", inode->bi_flags); > +       prt_printf(out, "(%x)\n", inode->bi_flags); I think it's ok. Maybe use prt_newline(out) is better than prt_printf(out, "\n"); >>>> >>>>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/inode.c >>>>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/inode.c >>>>> @@ -534,6 +534,8 @@ int bch2_inode_v3_invalid(struct bch_fs *c, struct >>>>> bkey_s_c k, >>>>>   static void __bch2_inode_unpacked_to_text(struct printbuf *out, >>>>> struct bch_inode_unpacked *inode) >>>>>   { >>>>> +       prt_newline(out); >>>>> + >>>>>          printbuf_indent_add(out, 2); >>>>>          prt_printf(out, "mode=%o", inode->bi_mode); >>>>>          prt_newline(out); >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Youling. >>>> >>>