On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:31:07AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > + * For a remap operation, just "allocate" an extent at the address that the
> > + * caller passed in, and ensure that the AGFL is the right size. The caller
> > + * will then map the "allocated" extent into the file somewhere.
> > + */
> > +STATIC int
> > +xfs_bmap_remap_alloc(
> > + struct xfs_bmalloca *ap)
> > +{
> > + struct xfs_trans *tp = ap->tp;
> > + struct xfs_mount *mp = tp->t_mountp;
> > + xfs_agblock_t bno;
> > + struct xfs_alloc_arg args;
> > + int error;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * validate that the block number is legal - the enables us to detect
> > + * and handle a silent filesystem corruption rather than crashing.
> > + */
> > + memset(&args, 0, sizeof(struct xfs_alloc_arg));
> > + args.tp = ap->tp;
> > + args.mp = ap->tp->t_mountp;
> > + bno = *ap->firstblock;
> > + args.agno = XFS_FSB_TO_AGNO(mp, bno);
> > + ASSERT(args.agno < mp->m_sb.sb_agcount);
> > + args.agbno = XFS_FSB_TO_AGBNO(mp, bno);
> > + ASSERT(args.agbno < mp->m_sb.sb_agblocks);
>
> Shouldn't this return -EFSCORRUPED instead? Otherwise the comment
> above isn't really true.
Hmm, yes. I'll fix that up.
--D
>
> Otherwise this looks fine to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
