On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 10:17:16PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 02:07:34PM +0800, Yangtao Li wrote:
> > Just for better readability, no code logic change.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/ext4/inode.c | 3 +--
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > index d251d705c276..d121cde74522 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > @@ -2218,8 +2218,7 @@ static int mpage_process_page_bufs(struct mpage_da_data *mpd,
> > {
> > struct inode *inode = mpd->inode;
> > int err;
> > - ext4_lblk_t blocks = (i_size_read(inode) + i_blocksize(inode) - 1)
> > - >> inode->i_blkbits;
> > + ext4_lblk_t blocks = DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(inode), i_blocksize(inode));
> >
>
> Please don't do this. This makes the code compile down to a division, which is
> far less efficient. I've verified this by checking the assembly generated.
Which compiler is doing that?
