Re: [PATCH] Use do_div() instead of native 64-bit division in btrfs_ordered_sum_size()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 09:28 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 07:13 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Chris, can you please put this patch in?  Without it btrfs can't be
> > loaded on 32bit platforms.
> > 
> 
> I've pushed out a slightly different fix.  The ordered extents are
> based on ram writeback, and so an unsigned long is enough.

Does the job for me, although we still need the
s/BUG_ON(spin_trylock(&tree->lock))/assert_spin_locked(&tree->lock)/
patch I sent a few days ago.

Now I can actually build the module, load it and avoid it hitting a
BUG_ON() when it first tries to mount, I can perhaps move on to doing
something more useful with it... :)

-- 
David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx                              Intel Corporation

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux