Kai Krakow posted on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:37:57 +0100 as excerpted: >>> BTW, my first impression was that "errors 400" means something like >>> "400 errors" - but that is just a hex bitmask which shows what errors >>> have been found. So "errors 100" is just _one_ bit set, thus only >>> _one_ >>> error. >> >> Same impression here, tho I did wonder at the conveniently even number >> of errors... Perhaps "errors" should be retermed "error-mask" or some >> such, >> to make the meaning clearer? > > Of course the numbers are even because they are powers of two: That's what I meant: Once I read that they were bit-flags and thus powers of two represented in octal or hex, it made sense. Before that, I had idly/sub-consciously wondered why errors "coincidentally" seemed to always occur in nice round batches of X-hundred, etc, but it hadn't yet risen to a level of consciousness where I was even aware what it was that seemed odd about it -- that only happened in hindsight once I read the bitflags explanation and realized what had been subconsciously bothering me about the "too round" numbers I was interpreting them as, before. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- 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
