On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:20:28AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Looks good. > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > Minor comments below: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 04:19:16PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > - end = bp->b_file_offset + bp->b_buffer_length; > > - page_count = xfs_buf_btoc(end) - xfs_buf_btoct(bp->b_file_offset); > > + end = BBTOB(bp->b_bn) + bp->b_buffer_length; > > + page_count = xfs_buf_btoc(end) - xfs_buf_btoct(BBTOB(bp->b_bn)); > > Btw, xfs_buf_btoc and xfs_buf_btoct are more remoal candidates, > they actually make the code harder to read compared to using the > opencoded arithmetics.. Ok, I'll consider doing that in the next set of patches. > > numbytes = numblks << BBSHIFT; > > > > /* Check for IOs smaller than the sector size / not sector aligned */ > > ASSERT(!(numbytes < (1 << btp->bt_sshift))); > > - ASSERT(!(offset & (xfs_off_t)btp->bt_smask)); > > + ASSERT(!(BBTOB(blkno) & (xfs_off_t)btp->bt_smask)); > > I don't think it makes sense to keep this assert, given that the > return value from BBTOB is aligned by defintion. I kept them there for the 4k sector case. Basic Blocks are always 512 bytes, so for filesystems with sector sizes greater than 512 bytes we still need a sector alignment and size check. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
