On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 09:00:19PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The way the alignment field is used the minimum possible alignment is 1.
> By setting it to 0 we'll mess up calculations that rely on this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> index 2760bc3..19c05e9 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c
> @@ -3796,7 +3796,7 @@ xfs_bmap_btalloc(
> */
> args.type = atype;
> args.fsbno = ap->blkno;
> - args.alignment = 0;
> + args.alignment = 1;
Ok, but we have the following near the top of xfs_alloc_vextent():
if (args->alignment == 0)
args->alignment = 1;
... so I'm not sure the commit log description is accurate. That aside:
Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>
Brian
> if ((error = xfs_alloc_vextent(&args)))
> return error;
> }
> --
> 2.1.4
>
> --
> 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
--
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
