It looks like it is always reset just after “again:” label. So, yes, your fix does not change the logic.
Feel free to add:
Reviewed-by: Artem Blagodarenko <artem.blagodarenko@xxxxxxxxx>
Best regards,
Artem Blagodarenko
> On 17 May 2021, at 11:44, tiantao (H) <tiantao6@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> 在 2021/5/17 16:05, Благодаренко Артём 写道:
>>
>>> On 17 May 2021, at 05:56, Tian Tao <tiantao6@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> In line 2500 of the ext4_dx_add_entry function, the at variable is
>>> assigned but not used, and it is reassigned in line 2449, so delete
>>> the assignment of the at variable in line 2500.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tian Tao <tiantao6@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> fs/ext4/namei.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
>>> index afb9d05..18bbf15 100644
>>> --- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
>>> +++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
>>> @@ -2497,7 +2497,7 @@ static int ext4_dx_add_entry(handle_t *handle, struct ext4_filename *fname,
>>>
>>> /* Which index block gets the new entry? */
>>> if (at - entries >= icount1) {
>>> - frame->at = at = at - entries - icount1 + entries2;
>>> + frame->at = at - entries - icount1 + entries2;
>>> frame->entries = entries = entries2;
>>> swap(frame->bh, bh2);
>>> }
>>> --
>>> 2.7.4
>>>
>>
>> Hello Tian,
>>
>> Thank you for the patch.
>>
>> Please, clarify, do you think the logic not changed after you patch if "while (frame > frames) {“ loop is not executed or terminated by “break:” in " if (dx_get_count((frame - 1)->entries) < ...“ block?
>
> yes, it's reported by svace. and I check the code it's not change the logic. myabe I was wrong:-P
>
>> Also I am not sure code lines numbers in the description are useful for future readers, because they can be changed.
> I can update the commit message at v2.
>>
>> Thank you..
