On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I agree with moving ext4_xattr_rehash_entry() out of ext4_xattr_rehash().
> However how about just keeping ext4_xattr_rehash() in
> ext4_xattr_block_set() (so that you don't have to pass aditional argument
> to ext4_xattr_set_entry()) and calling ext4_xattr_rehash_entry() when
> i->value != NULL? That would seem easier and cleaner as well...
The is_block parameter is also used to decide whether block reserve
check should be performed:
@@ -1500,8 +1502,8 @@ static int ext4_xattr_set_entry(struct ext4_xattr_info *i,
* attribute block so that a long value does not occupy the
* whole space and prevent futher entries being added.
*/
- if (ext4_has_feature_ea_inode(inode->i_sb) && new_size &&
- (s->end - s->base) == i_blocksize(inode) &&
+ if (ext4_has_feature_ea_inode(inode->i_sb) &&
+ new_size && is_block &&
(min_offs + old_size - new_size) <
EXT4_XATTR_BLOCK_RESERVE(inode)) {
ret = -ENOSPC;
Because of that, I think moving ext4_xattr_rehash to caller makes it
bit more complicated. Let me know if you disagree.
