On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 05:23:33PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > When freeing a group's metadata blocks, be careful not to free > clusters belonging to other groups! > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > resize/resize2fs.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/resize/resize2fs.c b/resize/resize2fs.c > index ff5e6a2..49fe986 100644 > --- a/resize/resize2fs.c > +++ b/resize/resize2fs.c > @@ -270,40 +270,60 @@ static void fix_uninit_block_bitmaps(ext2_filsys fs) > * release them in the new filesystem data structure, and mark them as > * reserved so the old inode table blocks don't get overwritten. > */ > -static void free_gdp_blocks(ext2_filsys fs, > - ext2fs_block_bitmap reserve_blocks, > - ext2_filsys old_fs, > - dgrp_t group) > +static errcode_t free_gdp_blocks(ext2_filsys fs, > + ext2fs_block_bitmap reserve_blocks, > + ext2_filsys old_fs, > + dgrp_t group, dgrp_t count) This function is only used in one place, and "count" is calculated using values from fs and old_fs. old_fs->group_desc_count - fs->group_desc_count Wouldn't it be clearer to do this calculation in free_gdp_blocks, i.e: dgrp_t count = old_fs->group_desc_count - fs->group_desc_count; This makes it clearer what's going on, instead of using a generic parameter name such as "count" which isn't as clear... - 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
