Re: [PATCH V7 10/17] xfs: Use xfs_rfsblock_t to count maximum blocks that can be used by BMBT

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 04:09:31PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>

What was reported by the robot? I don't quite see the relevance of
this change to the overall patchset just from the change being made.

> Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> index 9df98339a43a..a01d9a9225ae 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> @@ -53,8 +53,8 @@ xfs_bmap_compute_maxlevels(
>  	int		whichfork)	/* data or attr fork */
>  {
>  	xfs_extnum_t	maxleafents;	/* max leaf entries possible */
> +	xfs_rfsblock_t	maxblocks;	/* max blocks at this level */

typedef uint64_t        xfs_rfsblock_t; /* blockno in filesystem (raw) */

Usage of the type doesn't seem to match it's definition. This
function is calculating a block count, not a block number. If you
must use a xfs type, then:

typedef uint64_t        xfs_filblks_t;  /* number of blocks in a file */

is a better match, but I think this should just use uint64_t because
the count has nothing to do with block addresses or files..

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com