From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: "'linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com'" <linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs_check: fix test for too-high level in v2 dir node
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 15:55:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <523A134B.6010609@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <523A0AF0.3000507@sandeen.net>
On 09/18/13 15:20, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 9/18/13 2:35 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
>> On 09/12/13 16:00, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> The test as it stands allows level == XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH (5),
>>> but a max depth of 5 equates to level values of 0 through 4.
>>>
>>> Level 5 would be a depth of 6.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen<sandeen@redhat.com>
>>> ---
...
>> I think the current code is correct.
> So confused. :/ (Maybe the cursor array needs to be 1 bigger?)
>
> -Eric
Well, I am frequently noted as being permanently confused!
I was referring to the kernel use of XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH. All the
comparison indicate that having a value of 1 to XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH as
being okay.
When it accesses the xfs_da_state_blk_t blk[XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH],
it decrements the index first there is no blk[] entry for a leaf that
is why it does not need another entry.
I need to study this more.
--Mark.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-18 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-12 21:00 [PATCH] xfs_check: fix test for too-high level in v2 dir node Eric Sandeen
2013-09-18 19:35 ` Mark Tinguely
2013-09-18 20:20 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-09-18 20:55 ` Mark Tinguely [this message]
2013-09-23 13:36 ` Mark Tinguely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=523A134B.6010609@sgi.com \
--to=tinguely@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.