On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:58:21AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > At 11/02/2016 11:21 PM, David Sterba wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:15:52AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > >> From: Lu Fengqi <lufq.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Introduce a new function find_dir_item() to find DIR_ITEM for the given > >> key, and check it with the specified INODE_REF/INODE_EXTREF match. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Lu Fengqi <lufq.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> cmds-check.c | 140 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 140 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/cmds-check.c b/cmds-check.c > >> index 998ba63..4e25804 100644 > >> --- a/cmds-check.c > >> +++ b/cmds-check.c > >> @@ -3848,6 +3848,146 @@ out: > >> return err; > >> } > >> > >> +#define ROOT_DIR_ERROR (1<<1) /* bad root_dir */ > >> +#define DIR_ITEM_MISSING (1<<2) /* DIR_ITEM not found */ > >> +#define DIR_ITEM_MISMATCH (1<<3) /* DIR_ITEM found but not match */ > > > > What's the reason for another definition of the error codes? They're > > mostly copied from te I_ERR_* counterparts. I'd rather have one set of > > error codes. > > The main reason is, in lowmem fsck mode, we are not checking inodes or > ref/backref in batch. > > If using I_ERR and REF_ERR, we can mixing them up as they share the same > bits. > > So we introduced the new error bitmap, to make sure all error bits won't > cover each other. > > It may be better if we rearrange I_ERR/REF_ERR to avoid conflicts. > E.g, let REF_ERR_ starts from lowest bit and let I_ERR_ starts from high > bits. Yes please. Third namespace for existing error bits is not a good option. Move the I_ERR bits to start from 32 and use them in the low-mem code that's been merged to devel. -- 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
