On Nov 7, 2022, at 5:21 AM, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Li Xi <lixi@xxxxxxx> > > -m option is added but no actual functionality is added. This > patch only adds the logic that when -m is specified, one of > -p/-y/-n options should be specified. And when -m is specified, > -C shouldn't be specified and the completion progress report won't > be triggered by sending SIGUSR1/SIGUSR2 signals. This simplifies > the implementation of multi-thread fsck in the future. > > Completion progress support with multi-thread fsck will be added > back after multi-thread fsck implementation is finished. Right > now, disable it to simplify the implementation of multi-thread fsck. > > Signed-off-by: Li Xi <lixi@xxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wshilong@xxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> Minor nit below, but looks OK otherwise: Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxx> > diff --git a/e2fsck/unix.c b/e2fsck/unix.c > index e5b672a2..1ee27f6a 100644 > --- a/e2fsck/unix.c > +++ b/e2fsck/unix.c > @@ -854,7 +855,8 @@ static errcode_t PRS(int argc, char *argv[], e2fsck_t *ret_ctx) > > phys_mem_kb = get_memory_size() / 1024; > ctx->readahead_kb = ~0ULL; > - while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "panyrcC:B:dE:fvtFVM:b:I:j:P:l:L:N:SsDkz:")) != EOF) > + > + while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "pamnyrcC:B:dE:fvtFVM:b:I:j:P:l:L:N:SsDkz:")) != EOF) I find it easier to find/add options when these are sorted in alphabetical order, but that is not solely the fault of this patch. At least 'm' is added in order relative to most other lower-case options. Cheers, Andreas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
