Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: fix root leak printk to use %lld instead of %llu

[Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1334 bytes --]



On 2020/7/23 下午10:20, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:07:22PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> I'm a actual human being so am incapable of converting u64 to s64 in my
>> head, use %lld so we can see the negative number in order to identify
>> which of our special roots we leaked.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
>> index f1fdbdd44c02..cc4081a1c7f9 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
>> @@ -1508,7 +1508,7 @@ void btrfs_check_leaked_roots(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
>>  	while (!list_empty(&fs_info->allocated_roots)) {
>>  		root = list_first_entry(&fs_info->allocated_roots,
>>  					struct btrfs_root, leak_list);
>> -		btrfs_err(fs_info, "leaked root %llu-%llu refcount %d",
>> +		btrfs_err(fs_info, "leaked root %lld-%llu refcount %d",
> 
> But this is wrong in another way, roots with high numbers will appear as
> negative numbers.
> 

Nope. We won't have that many roots.

In fact, for subvolumes, the highest id is only 2 ^ 48, an special limit
introduced for qgroup.

So we won't have high enough subvolume ids to be negative, but only
special trees.

Thanks,
Qu


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]