On 2024/2/14 0:38, Jan Kara wrote:
On Fri 26-01-24 16:57:16, Baokun Li wrote:
The max_zeroout is of type int and the s_extent_max_zeroout_kb is of
type uint, and the s_extent_max_zeroout_kb can be freely modified via
the sysfs interface. When the block size is 1024, max_zeroout may
overflow, so declare it as unsigned int to avoid overflow.
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/ext4/extents.c | 6 ++----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
index 01299b55a567..8653b13e8248 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
@@ -3425,10 +3425,8 @@ static int ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized(handle_t *handle,
struct ext4_extent zero_ex1, zero_ex2;
struct ext4_extent *ex, *abut_ex;
ext4_lblk_t ee_block, eof_block;
- unsigned int ee_len, depth, map_len = map->m_len;
- int allocated = 0, max_zeroout = 0;
- int err = 0;
- int split_flag = EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2;
+ unsigned int ee_len, depth, map_len = map->m_len, max_zeroout = 0;
+ int err = 0, allocated = 0, split_flag = EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2;
Honestly, I prefer if we keep unrelated variables on different lines,
especially when they have initializers. I find the code more readable that
way. So in this case:
int err = 0;
int split_flag = EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2;
int allocated = 0;
unsigned int max_zeroout = 0;
But otherwise the fix looks good!
Honza
Totally agree! I will replace it in the next version.
Thanks!
--
With Best Regards,
Baokun Li
.
