On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 05:45:55PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 6/27/17 7:42 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> + ino = XFS_AGINO_TO_INO(mp, xfs_daddr_to_agno(mp, b), > >> + ((b << BBSHIFT) >> mp->m_sb.sb_inodelog) % > >> + (mp->m_sb.sb_agblocks << mp->m_sb.sb_inopblog)); > > > XFS_OFFBNO_TO_AGINO(mp, xfs_daddr_to_agbno(mp, b), 0) instead of that > > long third argument? > > Hm, nope: > > xfs_db> inode 99 > xfs_db> daddr > current daddr is 99 > > xfs_db> daddr 99 > xfs_db> type inode > xfs_db> inode > current inode number is 96 > > > That ends up taking the first inode in the fsblock (12), not the sector > (99) I guess. > > The macro needs a non-zero offset into the fsblock... found by, um... > I'm not sure that's going to be much prettier. > > How much do you hate how I wrote it first? ;) (I kind of hate it a > lot but dunno what else we have?) I guess there's also the problem that if inodesize != 512 then what are we targeting, anyway? If inodesize = 256 then we can only hit even-numbered inodes (not so bad) but if inodesize > 512 then do we jump back to wherever the inode starts? Or just give the user what they asked for, even if it's garbage? (FWIW I was fine with xfs_db being dumb and giving you exactly what you point it at, even if that makes no sense. :P) --D > > -Eric > -- > 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
