On 2011-04-08, at 10:44 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 11/23/10 3:21 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> # rm -f a; touch a; filefrag -v a
>>
>> yields 1 extent when it should be 0. Without -v, 0 is returned.
>>
>> Fix this up by special-casing no extents returned in verbose
>> mode; skip printing the header for the columns too, since there
>> are no columns to print.
>>
>> Also, in nonverbose mode we can set fm_extent_count to 0
>> so that FIEMAP will just query the extent count without gathering
>> details; as it is today I think a non-verbose query may under-report
>> the extent count once "count" extents have been filled in.
>>
>> Addresses-redhat-bugzilla: 653234
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ping^3
>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/misc/filefrag.c b/misc/filefrag.c
>> index bd4486d..a48b9b0 100644
>> --- a/misc/filefrag.c
>> +++ b/misc/filefrag.c
>> @@ -194,7 +194,14 @@ static int filefrag_fiemap(int fd, int blk_shift, int *num_extents)
>> do {
>> fiemap->fm_length = ~0ULL;
>> fiemap->fm_flags = flags;
>> - fiemap->fm_extent_count = count;
>> + /*
>> + * If fm_extent_count == 0, FIEMAP returns count of
>> + * extents found without filling in details.
>> + */
>> + if (!verbose)
>> + fiemap->fm_extent_count = 0;
>> + else
>> + fiemap->fm_extent_count = count;
This is already checked before the start of the do {} while() loop, just above the context of this patch:
if (!verbose)
count = 0;
No point in checking (!verbose) inside the loop.
>> @@ -206,6 +213,14 @@ static int filefrag_fiemap(int fd, int blk_shift, int *num_extents)
>> }
>>
>> if (verbose && !fiemap_header_printed) {
>> + /*
>> + * No extents on first call?
>> + * Skip header and show 0 extents.
>> + */
>> + if (fiemap->fm_mapped_extents == 0) {
>> + *num_extents = 0;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> printf(" ext %*s %*s %*s length flags\n", logical_width,
>> "logical", physical_width, "physical",
>> physical_width, "expected");
This part definitely makes sense.
Cheers, Andreas
--
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
