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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox