On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 10:52:45AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > Did you test this patch before submitting it? > > Argh, stupid me. I've just tested that I didn't break anything for normal > block size and thought that I cannot make mistake in such a simple thing > ;). Could I ask you to perhaps include some 64k blocksize test cases that would exercise the new codepaths? > > The only way to do this is to find all of the places that reference > > rec_len, and do the check there. > Yes.. Thanks for having look. One suggestion is that instead of just creating an conversion function, and then doing a global search and replace, in some places it might be better to declare an integer variable, and then assign "rec_len = ext2fs_rec_len_from_disk(dirent->rec_len)". For example, that would make ext2fs_process_dir_block() more readable, where dirent->rec_len is used no less than eight times. Thanks, and my apologies for not having time to review the patch until now. At the moment things are a bit crazy since I am effectively doing two jobs, since I am in transition between two assignments, and me doing most of both of them at the moment. I should have substantially more time after the new year begins. - Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
