On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, David Sterba wrote:
> > +static int ext2_free_block_range(ext2_filsys fs, u64 block, int num)
> > +{
> > + BUG_ON(block != (blk_t)block);
>
> What's the purpose of this? Some kind of overflow check?
ext2_free_block contains the same check, so I put one in
ext2_free_block_range for consistency. I assumed it was an overflow check
as blk_t is u32.
> Otherwise looks good. If you're going to resend, please split the patch
> into one logical change per patch:
>
> 1) generic and preparatory changes, like moving the check_node to
> utils.c, moving the mkfs default leaf size
>
> 2) the changes to convert, ie. most of this patch minus 1 and 3
>
> 3) the tests
Thanks for the review! Will resend with the fixes when I know whether
blocks[] must be aligned to nodesize or not.
--
Sebastian Thorarensen
--
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
