On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:24:08PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Semantic patches... a very interesting idea.
>
> On Aug 04, 2009 14:18 -0400, Valerie Aurora wrote:
> > // Free blocks
> > -fs->group_desc[group].bg_free_blocks_count++
> > +ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count_set(fs, group, ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count(fs, group)+1)
> > |
> > -fs->group_desc[group].bg_free_blocks_count--
> > +ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count_set(fs, group, ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count(fs, group)-1)
> > |
> > -fs->group_desc[group].bg_free_blocks_count += i
> > +ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count_set(fs, group, ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count(fs, group)+i)
> > |
> > -fs->group_desc[group].bg_free_blocks_count -= i
> > +ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count_set(fs, group, ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count(fs, group)-i)
>
> I wonder if it makes more sense for ext2fs to export functions like
> ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count_add() and ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count_sub()?
I am agnostic.
> > -fs->group_desc[group].bg_flags = 0
> > +ext2fs_bg_flags_clear(fs, group, 0)
>
> This last one looks like an error. To clear the flags you should
> use ext2fs_bg_flags_set(fs, group, 0), otherwise you are "clearing
> no flags".
The code does the right thing:
void ext2fs_bg_flags_clear(ext2_filsys fs, dgrp_t group, __u16 bg_flags)
{
if (fs->super->s_desc_size >= EXT2_MIN_DESC_SIZE_64BIT) {
struct ext4_group_desc *gdp;
gdp = (struct ext4_group_desc *) (fs->group_desc) + group;
gdp->bg_flags = 0;
return;
}
fs->group_desc[group].bg_flags = 0;
}
The problem is that this function is stupidly named:
ext2fs_bg_flag_clear() - does what you think
ext2fs_bg_flags_clear() - does above
^
It should be removed and replaced by ext2fs_bg_flags_set(), I agree.
-VAL
--
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
