On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 01:40 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > Perhaps, after checking cluster-chain corruption is better. Thanks. That can be done, but not like that, I think. At the point you added the blkdev_issue_discard() call, the value of 'cluster' has already changed. So if the chain being freed is clusters 10, 11 and 12, your version of the patch will attempt to discard clusters 11, 12 and 0xFFFF (EOF). On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 02:14 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > Ah, blkdev_issue_discard() assumes blocksize is 512bytes, um... Doesn't everything? I did consider using q->hardsect_size, but decided that was probably the wrong thing to do. I don't know. Jens? > blkdev_issue_discard() takes bytes, -EPARSE. It takes sectors at the moment -- do you mean you _want_ it to take bytes? > and instead add some helpers for sb or inode? I suppose we could; I'm not really so sure we need them. inode->i_sb->s_bdev isn't exactly hard... -- dwmw2 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
