On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 08:28:29AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 07:29:57AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Get rid of two of the static limits, and move the third to the one file > > that uses it. > > Removing the two now unused one is obvious, but could still be stated > here to not puzzle the future git log reader. But why move the third > one? It's only needed in newbt.c. What if I change the commit message to: "xfs: remove static reap limits from repair.h "Delete XREAP_MAX_BINVAL and XREAP_MAX_DEFER_CHAIN because the reap code now calculates those limits dynamically, so they're no longer needed. "Move the third limit (XREP_MAX_ITRUNCATE_EFIS) to the one file that uses it. Note that the btree rebuilding code should reserve exactly the number of blocks needed to rebuild a btree, so it is rare that the newbt code will need to add any EFIs to the commit transaction. That's why that static limit remains." Would that make it clearer? --D
