* Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 06:43:13PM -0500, Eric Whitney wrote: > > I've built the contents of the current e2fsprogs maint branch (4727c67dc2) > > and run make check on both a Pandaboard (ARM) and an x86-64 VM. In each > > case I used the following arguments to configure: --disable-uuidd > > --disable-libuuid --disable-libblkid. > > > > Both the ARM and x86-64 runs produced warnings when compiling ea_refcount.c > > during make check. I posted a patch yesterday (e2fsck: fix printf > > conversion specs in ea_refcount.c) that clears those up for me on both > > platforms. > > > > The ARM build and make check were otherwise clean. > > > > The x86-64 build and make check contained one more problem - a warning while > > compiling debugfs.c: > > ../../debugfs/debugfs.c:2462:5: warning: too many arguments for format > > [-Wformat-extra-args] > > > > This code (commit fe56188b07) is part of that used to check superblock block > > numbers specified on the command line, and the error reporting has become > > a little fuzzy relative to what we had previously. > > > > Before: > > > > root@debug1:~# debugfs -s 327b /dev/vdc > > debugfs 1.42.8 (20-Jun-2013) > > debugfs: Bad superblock number - 327b > > > > After: > > > > root@debug1:~# debugfs -s 327b /dev/vdc > > debugfs 1.42.8 (20-Jun-2013) > > debugfs: Bad block number - 327b > > debugfs: Invalid block number: 327b > > debugfs: Operation not permitted > > > > Both strtoblk() and parseulonglong() (which it calls) output error messages > > for bad/invalid block numbers, which is redundant in this case. The last > > (erroneous) error message is output by the call to com_err() which also > > causes the warning noted above. > > > > It seems to me that the call to com_err() ought to be deleted, and maybe > > the immediately preceding call to strtoblk() ought to be converted to a call > > to parseulonglong() to restore the original messaging. I'd like to post a > > patch, but there are a number of other calls to strtoblk() in debugfs now > > that will produce two messages on errors, and the intent isn't clear to me. > > Is this just an area that needed a little more polish? > > Back in October, I wrote a patch[1] that did a straight conversion to > parse_ulonglong for 64bit support, but Lukas suggested using strtoblk instead. > So I changed it, and that's what's in there now... uglified. Sorry about that. > I should have argued more strongly against strtoblk. :( > > I don't have a problem with changing it to parse_ulonglong. > > [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/279295/ > Thanks for the background. Since Ted accepted the strtoblk() changes, maybe he's ok with the changed error reporting. For now, since I think he's interested in getting the next e2fsprogs maint release out the door, I posted a simple patch just to address the compile-time warning and that last broken error message. There are enough strtoblk() call sites that it's probably better to address them all and apply a common solution or not address any of them rather than to address just one. Thanks, Eric -- 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
