On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Does this patch fix your issues with large block sizes?
I'll be able to try it in the evening but meanwhile I have some comments below.
>
>
> Index: linux-2.6/fs/hfsplus/super.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/hfsplus/super.c 2011-09-12 09:56:58.619988416 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6/fs/hfsplus/super.c 2011-09-12 10:07:18.006651395 -0400
> @@ -344,6 +344,7 @@ static int hfsplus_fill_super(struct sup
> struct inode *root, *inode;
> struct qstr str;
> struct nls_table *nls = NULL;
> + u64 last_fs_block, last_fs_page;
> int err;
>
> err = -EINVAL;
> @@ -399,9 +400,13 @@ static int hfsplus_fill_super(struct sup
> if (!sbi->rsrc_clump_blocks)
> sbi->rsrc_clump_blocks = 1;
>
> - err = generic_check_addressable(sbi->alloc_blksz_shift,
> - sbi->total_blocks);
> - if (err) {
> + err = -EFBIG;
> + last_fs_block = sbi->total_blocks - 1;
> + last_fs_page = (last_fs_block >> sbi->alloc_blksz_shift) <<
> + PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
Did you mix left and right shifts here? Expression doesn't make sense to me.
Also I have a little concern about consistency in using
PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT and PAGE_SHIFT. hfsplus_read_wrapper() limits visible
block size to PAGE_SIZE, not PAGE_CACHE_SIZE. And although now they
are equal comment in linux/pagemap.h clearly says that PAGE_CACHE_SIZE
can be bigger than PAGE_SIZE. Is it something that should be fixed in
hfsplus_read_wrapper() ?
> +
> + if ((last_fs_block > (sector_t)(~0ULL) >> (sbi->alloc_blksz_shift - 9)) ||
Maybe this 9 should be extracted from here and
generic_check_addressable() into some macro?
> + (last_fs_page > (pgoff_t)(~0ULL))) {
> printk(KERN_ERR "hfs: filesystem size too large.\n");
> goto out_free_vhdr;
> }
>
--
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
