* [PATCH v3, 01/16] xfsprogs: metadump: some names aren't all that special
@ 2011-02-18 21:21 Alex Elder
2011-02-24 1:18 ` Dave Chinner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alex Elder @ 2011-02-18 21:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xfs
Move the check for short names out of is_special_dirent() and into
generate_obfuscated_name(). That way the check is more directly
associated with the algorithm that requires it.
Similarly, move the check for inode == 0, since that case has to do
with storing extended attributes (not files) in the name table.
As a result, is_special_dirent() is really only focused on whether a
given file is in the lost+found directory. Rename the function to
reflect its more specific purpose.
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
Updated:
- The previous version did not properly skip the "lost+found"
directory itself; this one does.
- Created a new definition representing the name of the orphanage
directory. Encapsulate recognizing that directory into a new
macro, is_lost_found().
- Removed casts that eliminate a compile warning in calls to
libxfs_da_hashname(); will do them separately later if needed.
---
db/metadump.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
Index: b/db/metadump.c
===================================================================
--- a/db/metadump.c
+++ b/db/metadump.c
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- * Copyright (c) 2007 Silicon Graphics, Inc.
+ * Copyright (c) 2007, 2011 SGI
* All Rights Reserved.
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
@@ -377,40 +377,56 @@ random_filename_char(void)
return c;
}
+/*
+ * Determine whether a name is one we shouldn't obfuscate because
+ * it's an orphan (or the "lost+found" directory itself). Note
+ * "cur_ino" is the inode for the directory currently being
+ * processed.
+ *
+ * Returns 1 if the name should NOT be obfuscated or 0 otherwise.
+ */
+#define is_lost_found(mnt, dir_ino, nmlen, nm) \
+ ((dir_ino) == (mnt)->m_sb.sb_rootino && \
+ (nmlen) == ORPHANAGE_LEN && \
+ !memcmp((nm), ORPHANAGE, ORPHANAGE_LEN))
+
+#define ORPHANAGE "lost+found"
+#define ORPHANAGE_LEN (sizeof ORPHANAGE - 1)
+
static int
-is_special_dirent(
+in_lost_found(
xfs_ino_t ino,
int namelen,
uchar_t *name)
{
static xfs_ino_t orphanage_ino = 0;
- char s[32];
+ char s[24]; /* 21 is enough */
int slen;
- /*
- * due to the XFS name hashing algorithm, we cannot obfuscate
- * names with 4 chars or less.
- */
- if (namelen <= 4)
- return 1;
+ /* Record the "lost+found" inode if we haven't done so already */
- if (ino == 0)
+ ASSERT(ino != 0);
+ if (!orphanage_ino && is_lost_found(mp, cur_ino, namelen, name))
+ orphanage_ino = ino;
+
+ /* We don't obfuscate the "lost+found" directory itself */
+
+ if (ino == orphanage_ino)
+ return 1;
+
+ /* Most files aren't in "lost+found" at all */
+
+ if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
return 0;
/*
- * don't obfuscate lost+found nor any inodes within lost+found with
- * the inode number
+ * Within "lost+found", we don't obfuscate any file whose
+ * name is the same as its inode number. Any others are
+ * stray files and can be obfuscated.
*/
- if (cur_ino == mp->m_sb.sb_rootino && namelen == 10 &&
- memcmp(name, "lost+found", 10) == 0) {
- orphanage_ino = ino;
- return 1;
- }
- if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
- return 0;
+ slen = snprintf(s, sizeof s, "%llu", (unsigned long long) ino);
- slen = sprintf(s, "%lld", (long long)ino);
- return (slen == namelen && memcmp(name, s, namelen) == 0);
+ return slen == namelen && !memcmp(name, s, namelen);
}
static void
@@ -426,13 +442,25 @@ generate_obfuscated_name(
xfs_dahash_t newhash;
uchar_t newname[NAME_MAX];
- if (is_special_dirent(ino, namelen, name))
- return;
+ /*
+ * Our obfuscation algorithm requires at least 5-character
+ * names, so don't bother if the name is too short.
+ */
+ if (namelen < 5)
+ return;
- hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
+ /*
+ * We don't obfuscate "lost+found" or any orphan files
+ * therein. When the name table is used for extended
+ * attributes, the inode number provided is 0, in which
+ * case we don't need to make this check.
+ */
+ if (ino && in_lost_found(ino, namelen, name))
+ return;
/* create a random name with the same hash value */
+ hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
do {
dup = 0;
newname[0] = '/';
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3, 01/16] xfsprogs: metadump: some names aren't all that special
2011-02-18 21:21 [PATCH v3, 01/16] xfsprogs: metadump: some names aren't all that special Alex Elder
@ 2011-02-24 1:18 ` Dave Chinner
2011-02-24 21:50 ` Alex Elder
2011-02-25 18:13 ` [PATCH v4, " Alex Elder
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dave Chinner @ 2011-02-24 1:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Elder; +Cc: xfs
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 03:21:01PM -0600, Alex Elder wrote:
> Move the check for short names out of is_special_dirent() and into
> generate_obfuscated_name(). That way the check is more directly
> associated with the algorithm that requires it.
>
> Similarly, move the check for inode == 0, since that case has to do
> with storing extended attributes (not files) in the name table.
>
> As a result, is_special_dirent() is really only focused on whether a
> given file is in the lost+found directory. Rename the function to
> reflect its more specific purpose.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
>
> Updated:
> - The previous version did not properly skip the "lost+found"
> directory itself; this one does.
> - Created a new definition representing the name of the orphanage
> directory. Encapsulate recognizing that directory into a new
> macro, is_lost_found().
> - Removed casts that eliminate a compile warning in calls to
> libxfs_da_hashname(); will do them separately later if needed.
>
> ---
> db/metadump.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> Index: b/db/metadump.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/db/metadump.c
> +++ b/db/metadump.c
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> /*
> - * Copyright (c) 2007 Silicon Graphics, Inc.
> + * Copyright (c) 2007, 2011 SGI
> * All Rights Reserved.
> *
> * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> @@ -377,40 +377,56 @@ random_filename_char(void)
> return c;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Determine whether a name is one we shouldn't obfuscate because
> + * it's an orphan (or the "lost+found" directory itself). Note
> + * "cur_ino" is the inode for the directory currently being
> + * processed.
> + *
> + * Returns 1 if the name should NOT be obfuscated or 0 otherwise.
> + */
> +#define is_lost_found(mnt, dir_ino, nmlen, nm) \
> + ((dir_ino) == (mnt)->m_sb.sb_rootino && \
> + (nmlen) == ORPHANAGE_LEN && \
> + !memcmp((nm), ORPHANAGE, ORPHANAGE_LEN))
Perhaps a static inline function?
> +
> +#define ORPHANAGE "lost+found"
> +#define ORPHANAGE_LEN (sizeof ORPHANAGE - 1)
sizeof works without ()? Even it is does, it is unusual to do so,
and a little ambiguous....
> +
> static int
> -is_special_dirent(
> +in_lost_found(
Oh, that confused me for a second - in_lost_found and is_lost_found
are very similar in name, hence easily confused when scanning the
code. Not sure how better to name them, maybe you've got a better
idea, Alex?
> xfs_ino_t ino,
> int namelen,
> uchar_t *name)
> {
> static xfs_ino_t orphanage_ino = 0;
> - char s[32];
> + char s[24]; /* 21 is enough */
Why is 21 enough?
> int slen;
>
> - /*
> - * due to the XFS name hashing algorithm, we cannot obfuscate
> - * names with 4 chars or less.
> - */
> - if (namelen <= 4)
> - return 1;
> + /* Record the "lost+found" inode if we haven't done so already */
>
> - if (ino == 0)
> + ASSERT(ino != 0);
> + if (!orphanage_ino && is_lost_found(mp, cur_ino, namelen, name))
> + orphanage_ino = ino;
> +
> + /* We don't obfuscate the "lost+found" directory itself */
> +
> + if (ino == orphanage_ino)
> + return 1;
> +
> + /* Most files aren't in "lost+found" at all */
> +
> + if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
> return 0;
I'm judging by this that if a directory tree is attached to
lost+found we are obfuscating anything in that subdirectory?
>
> /*
> - * don't obfuscate lost+found nor any inodes within lost+found with
> - * the inode number
> + * Within "lost+found", we don't obfuscate any file whose
> + * name is the same as its inode number. Any others are
> + * stray files and can be obfuscated.
> */
> - if (cur_ino == mp->m_sb.sb_rootino && namelen == 10 &&
> - memcmp(name, "lost+found", 10) == 0) {
> - orphanage_ino = ino;
> - return 1;
> - }
> - if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
> - return 0;
> + slen = snprintf(s, sizeof s, "%llu", (unsigned long long) ino);
>
> - slen = sprintf(s, "%lld", (long long)ino);
> - return (slen == namelen && memcmp(name, s, namelen) == 0);
> + return slen == namelen && !memcmp(name, s, namelen);
> }
>
> static void
> @@ -426,13 +442,25 @@ generate_obfuscated_name(
> xfs_dahash_t newhash;
> uchar_t newname[NAME_MAX];
>
> - if (is_special_dirent(ino, namelen, name))
> - return;
> + /*
> + * Our obfuscation algorithm requires at least 5-character
> + * names, so don't bother if the name is too short.
> + */
> + if (namelen < 5)
> + return;
Please make usre you include the reason for this - that this is a
property of the name hashing algorithm.
> - hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
> + /*
> + * We don't obfuscate "lost+found" or any orphan files
> + * therein. When the name table is used for extended
> + * attributes, the inode number provided is 0, in which
> + * case we don't need to make this check.
> + */
> + if (ino && in_lost_found(ino, namelen, name))
> + return;
>
> /* create a random name with the same hash value */
>
> + hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
> do {
> dup = 0;
> newname[0] = '/';
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
>
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3, 01/16] xfsprogs: metadump: some names aren't all that special
2011-02-24 1:18 ` Dave Chinner
@ 2011-02-24 21:50 ` Alex Elder
2011-02-25 18:13 ` [PATCH v4, " Alex Elder
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alex Elder @ 2011-02-24 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Chinner; +Cc: xfs
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 12:18 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 03:21:01PM -0600, Alex Elder wrote:
> > Move the check for short names out of is_special_dirent() and into
> > generate_obfuscated_name(). That way the check is more directly
> > associated with the algorithm that requires it.
> >
> > Similarly, move the check for inode == 0, since that case has to do
> > with storing extended attributes (not files) in the name table.
> >
> > As a result, is_special_dirent() is really only focused on whether a
> > given file is in the lost+found directory. Rename the function to
> > reflect its more specific purpose.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
> >
> > Updated:
. . .
> > +#define is_lost_found(mnt, dir_ino, nmlen, nm) \
> > + ((dir_ino) == (mnt)->m_sb.sb_rootino && \
> > + (nmlen) == ORPHANAGE_LEN && \
> > + !memcmp((nm), ORPHANAGE, ORPHANAGE_LEN))
>
> Perhaps a static inline function?
OK.
> > +
> > +#define ORPHANAGE "lost+found"
> > +#define ORPHANAGE_LEN (sizeof ORPHANAGE - 1)
>
> sizeof works without ()? Even it is does, it is unusual to do so,
> and a little ambiguous....
Yes it does. You need the parentheses when you're
asking about a type name, but for an object they are
not needed. It is not ambiguous. Nevertheless I don't
mind adding two characters to the patch.
> > +
> > static int
> > -is_special_dirent(
> > +in_lost_found(
>
> Oh, that confused me for a second - in_lost_found and is_lost_found
> are very similar in name, hence easily confused when scanning the
> code. Not sure how better to name them, maybe you've got a better
> idea, Alex?
I had the same thought, actually, but didn't do anything
about it. I could use is_orphanage_dir(), what do you think
of that? Or alternately could change in_lost_found() to
be is_orphan() (or both). Unless I hear a better suggestion
I'll just do is_orphanage_dir(), as an inline function.
>
> > xfs_ino_t ino,
> > int namelen,
> > uchar_t *name)
> > {
> > static xfs_ino_t orphanage_ino = 0;
> > - char s[32];
> > + char s[24]; /* 21 is enough */
>
> Why is 21 enough?
Because it's formatting a 64-bit unsigned in
decimal. 2^64 = 18 446 744 073 709 551 616
That's 20 digits, plus a trailing '\0'. Do
you want me to clarify this in a comment
somehow? (I suppose unsigned long long is
not technically guaranteed to be 64 bits
either.)
>
> > int slen;
> >
> > - /*
> > - * due to the XFS name hashing algorithm, we cannot obfuscate
> > - * names with 4 chars or less.
> > - */
> > - if (namelen <= 4)
> > - return 1;
> > + /* Record the "lost+found" inode if we haven't done so already */
> >
> > - if (ino == 0)
> > + ASSERT(ino != 0);
> > + if (!orphanage_ino && is_lost_found(mp, cur_ino, namelen, name))
> > + orphanage_ino = ino;
> > +
> > + /* We don't obfuscate the "lost+found" directory itself */
> > +
> > + if (ino == orphanage_ino)
> > + return 1;
> > +
> > + /* Most files aren't in "lost+found" at all */
> > +
> > + if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
> > return 0;
>
> I'm judging by this that if a directory tree is attached to
> lost+found we are obfuscating anything in that subdirectory?
Yes. I preserved the way the code worked before, which is that:
- lost+found itself is not obfuscated
- files directly under lost+found whose filename is the
decimal representation of the file's inode number are
treated as orphans, and they are not obfuscated
- anything else (including things in lost+found with
non-inode-number names, and anything below a subdirectory
under lost+found) is obfuscated.
> >
> > /*
> > - * don't obfuscate lost+found nor any inodes within lost+found with
> > - * the inode number
> > + * Within "lost+found", we don't obfuscate any file whose
> > + * name is the same as its inode number. Any others are
> > + * stray files and can be obfuscated.
> > */
> > - if (cur_ino == mp->m_sb.sb_rootino && namelen == 10 &&
> > - memcmp(name, "lost+found", 10) == 0) {
> > - orphanage_ino = ino;
> > - return 1;
> > - }
> > - if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
> > - return 0;
> > + slen = snprintf(s, sizeof s, "%llu", (unsigned long long) ino);
> >
> > - slen = sprintf(s, "%lld", (long long)ino);
> > - return (slen == namelen && memcmp(name, s, namelen) == 0);
> > + return slen == namelen && !memcmp(name, s, namelen);
> > }
> >
> > static void
> > @@ -426,13 +442,25 @@ generate_obfuscated_name(
> > xfs_dahash_t newhash;
> > uchar_t newname[NAME_MAX];
> >
> > - if (is_special_dirent(ino, namelen, name))
> > - return;
> > + /*
> > + * Our obfuscation algorithm requires at least 5-character
> > + * names, so don't bother if the name is too short.
> > + */
> > + if (namelen < 5)
> > + return;
>
> Please make usre you include the reason for this - that this is a
> property of the name hashing algorithm.
Well, the comment above it alludes to it, although
it emphasizes obfuscation rather than the hash.
I'll try to come up with a concise way to do
what you ask though.
> > - hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
> > + /*
> > + * We don't obfuscate "lost+found" or any orphan files
> > + * therein. When the name table is used for extended
> > + * attributes, the inode number provided is 0, in which
> > + * case we don't need to make this check.
> > + */
> > + if (ino && in_lost_found(ino, namelen, name))
> > + return;
> >
> > /* create a random name with the same hash value */
> >
> > + hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
> > do {
> > dup = 0;
> > newname[0] = '/';
> >
I'll adjust my patch based on your comments and re-post for
a final review. I'll fix and re-post the few other patches
you had suggestions on too.
Thanks a lot for reviewing it, Dave.
-Alex
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [PATCH v4, 01/16] xfsprogs: metadump: some names aren't all that special
2011-02-24 1:18 ` Dave Chinner
2011-02-24 21:50 ` Alex Elder
@ 2011-02-25 18:13 ` Alex Elder
2011-03-03 5:10 ` Dave Chinner
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alex Elder @ 2011-02-25 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Chinner; +Cc: xfs
Move the check for short names out of is_special_dirent() and into
generate_obfuscated_name(). That way the check is more directly
associated with the algorithm that requires it.
Similarly, move the check for inode == 0, since that case has to do
with storing extended attributes (not files) in the name table.
As a result, is_special_dirent() is really only focused on whether a
given file is in the lost+found directory. Rename the function to
reflect its more specific purpose.
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
Updates (v3):
- The previous version did not properly skip the "lost+found"
directory itself; this one does.
- Created a new definition representing the name of the orphanage
directory. Encapsulate recognizing that directory into a new
macro, is_lost_found().
- Removed casts that eliminate a compile warning in calls to
libxfs_da_hashname(); will do them separately later if needed.
Updates (v4):
- Renamed is_lost_found() to be is_orphanage_dir(), and turned
it into an inline static function.
- Added parentheses around targets of the sizeof operation.
- Added a small bit of clarifying commentary in spots where
it was suggested.
---
db/metadump.c | 86
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
Index: b/db/metadump.c
===================================================================
--- a/db/metadump.c
+++ b/db/metadump.c
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- * Copyright (c) 2007 Silicon Graphics, Inc.
+ * Copyright (c) 2007, 2011 SGI
* All Rights Reserved.
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
@@ -377,40 +377,63 @@ random_filename_char(void)
return c;
}
+#define ORPHANAGE "lost+found"
+#define ORPHANAGE_LEN (sizeof (ORPHANAGE) - 1)
+
+static inline int
+is_orphanage_dir(
+ struct xfs_mount *mp,
+ xfs_ino_t dir_ino,
+ size_t name_len,
+ uchar_t *name)
+{
+ return dir_ino == mp->m_sb.sb_rootino &&
+ name_len == ORPHANAGE_LEN &&
+ !memcmp(name, ORPHANAGE, ORPHANAGE_LEN);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Determine whether a name is one we shouldn't obfuscate because
+ * it's an orphan (or the "lost+found" directory itself). Note
+ * "cur_ino" is the inode for the directory currently being
+ * processed.
+ *
+ * Returns 1 if the name should NOT be obfuscated or 0 otherwise.
+ */
static int
-is_special_dirent(
+in_lost_found(
xfs_ino_t ino,
int namelen,
uchar_t *name)
{
static xfs_ino_t orphanage_ino = 0;
- char s[32];
+ char s[24]; /* 21 is enough (64 bits in decimal) */
int slen;
- /*
- * due to the XFS name hashing algorithm, we cannot obfuscate
- * names with 4 chars or less.
- */
- if (namelen <= 4)
- return 1;
+ /* Record the "lost+found" inode if we haven't done so already */
- if (ino == 0)
+ ASSERT(ino != 0);
+ if (!orphanage_ino && is_orphanage_dir(mp, cur_ino, namelen, name))
+ orphanage_ino = ino;
+
+ /* We don't obfuscate the "lost+found" directory itself */
+
+ if (ino == orphanage_ino)
+ return 1;
+
+ /* Most files aren't in "lost+found" at all */
+
+ if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
return 0;
/*
- * don't obfuscate lost+found nor any inodes within lost+found with
- * the inode number
+ * Within "lost+found", we don't obfuscate any file whose
+ * name is the same as its inode number. Any others are
+ * stray files and can be obfuscated.
*/
- if (cur_ino == mp->m_sb.sb_rootino && namelen == 10 &&
- memcmp(name, "lost+found", 10) == 0) {
- orphanage_ino = ino;
- return 1;
- }
- if (cur_ino != orphanage_ino)
- return 0;
+ slen = snprintf(s, sizeof (s), "%llu", (unsigned long long) ino);
- slen = sprintf(s, "%lld", (long long)ino);
- return (slen == namelen && memcmp(name, s, namelen) == 0);
+ return slen == namelen && !memcmp(name, s, namelen);
}
static void
@@ -426,13 +449,28 @@ generate_obfuscated_name(
xfs_dahash_t newhash;
uchar_t newname[NAME_MAX];
- if (is_special_dirent(ino, namelen, name))
- return;
+ /*
+ * Our obfuscation algorithm requires at least 5-character
+ * names, so don't bother if the name is too short. We
+ * work backward from a hash value to determine the last
+ * five bytes in a name required to produce a new name
+ * with the same hash.
+ */
+ if (namelen < 5)
+ return;
- hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
+ /*
+ * We don't obfuscate "lost+found" or any orphan files
+ * therein. When the name table is used for extended
+ * attributes, the inode number provided is 0, in which
+ * case we don't need to make this check.
+ */
+ if (ino && in_lost_found(ino, namelen, name))
+ return;
/* create a random name with the same hash value */
+ hash = libxfs_da_hashname(name, namelen);
do {
dup = 0;
newname[0] = '/';
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4, 01/16] xfsprogs: metadump: some names aren't all that special
2011-02-25 18:13 ` [PATCH v4, " Alex Elder
@ 2011-03-03 5:10 ` Dave Chinner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dave Chinner @ 2011-03-03 5:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Elder; +Cc: xfs
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:13:37PM -0600, Alex Elder wrote:
> Move the check for short names out of is_special_dirent() and into
> generate_obfuscated_name(). That way the check is more directly
> associated with the algorithm that requires it.
>
> Similarly, move the check for inode == 0, since that case has to do
> with storing extended attributes (not files) in the name table.
>
> As a result, is_special_dirent() is really only focused on whether a
> given file is in the lost+found directory. Rename the function to
> reflect its more specific purpose.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
>
> Updates (v3):
> - The previous version did not properly skip the "lost+found"
> directory itself; this one does.
> - Created a new definition representing the name of the orphanage
> directory. Encapsulate recognizing that directory into a new
> macro, is_lost_found().
> - Removed casts that eliminate a compile warning in calls to
> libxfs_da_hashname(); will do them separately later if needed.
> Updates (v4):
> - Renamed is_lost_found() to be is_orphanage_dir(), and turned
> it into an inline static function.
> - Added parentheses around targets of the sizeof operation.
> - Added a small bit of clarifying commentary in spots where
> it was suggested.
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-03 5:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-02-18 21:21 [PATCH v3, 01/16] xfsprogs: metadump: some names aren't all that special Alex Elder
2011-02-24 1:18 ` Dave Chinner
2011-02-24 21:50 ` Alex Elder
2011-02-25 18:13 ` [PATCH v4, " Alex Elder
2011-03-03 5:10 ` Dave Chinner
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox