> + if ((to->sb_qflags & (XFS_OQUOTA_ENFD | XFS_OQUOTA_CHKD)) &&
> + (to->sb_qflags & (XFS_PQUOTA_ENFD | XFS_GQUOTA_ENFD |
> + XFS_PQUOTA_CHKD | XFS_GQUOTA_CHKD))) {
> + xfs_notice(mp, "Super block has XFS_OQUOTA bits along with "
> + "XFS_PQUOTA and/or XFS_GQUOTA bits. Fixing it.\n");
> + }
> + if (to->sb_qflags & XFS_OQUOTA_ENFD)
> + to->sb_qflags |= (to->sb_qflags & XFS_PQUOTA_ACCT) ?
> + XFS_PQUOTA_ENFD : XFS_GQUOTA_ENFD;
> + if (to->sb_qflags & XFS_OQUOTA_CHKD)
> + to->sb_qflags |= (to->sb_qflags & XFS_PQUOTA_ACCT) ?
> + XFS_PQUOTA_CHKD : XFS_GQUOTA_CHKD;
> + to->sb_qflags &= ~(XFS_OQUOTA_ENFD | XFS_OQUOTA_CHKD);
It's suggest factoring this into a xfs_quota_flags_from_disk helper,
which a) makes this code more clear, and b) can get a comment about what
is going on.
> + /*
> + * The in-core version of sb_qflags do not have
> + * XFS_OQUOTA_* flags, whereas the on-disk version
> + * does. Save the in-core sb_qflags temporarily,
> + * removing the new XFS_{PG}QUOTA_* flags and re-apply
> + * the old on-disk flags.
> + */
> + tmp16 = from->sb_qflags &
> + ~(XFS_PQUOTA_ENFD | XFS_PQUOTA_CHKD |
> + XFS_GQUOTA_ENFD | XFS_GQUOTA_CHKD);
> + if (from->sb_qflags &
> + (XFS_PQUOTA_ENFD | XFS_GQUOTA_ENFD))
> + tmp16 |= XFS_OQUOTA_CHKD;
> + *(__be16 *)(to_ptr + first) = cpu_to_be16(tmp16);
Same here for the other direction.
> + * Start differentiating group quota and project quota in-core
> + * using distinct flags, instread of using the combined OQUOTA flags.
> + *
> + * Conversion to and from the combined OQUOTA flag (if necessary)
> + * is done only in xfs_sb{to, from}_disk()
> + */
> +#define XFS_GQUOTA_ENFD 0x0080 /* group quota limit enforced */
> +#define XFS_GQUOTA_CHKD 0x0100 /* quotacheck run on group quotas */
> +#define XFS_PQUOTA_ENFD 0x0200 /* project quota limits enforced */
> +#define XFS_PQUOTA_CHKD 0x0800 /* quotacheck run on project quotas.
> + * FIXME: here we cannot using 0x0400
> + * because it is already reserved for
> + * XFS_GQUOTA_ACTIVE. Otherwise,
> + * XFS_IS_GQUOTA_ON() is also true
> + * although it does not enabled.
> + */
Seems like all te 0x0?00 values are used for XFS_U?UOTA_ACTIVE flags.
Why not move it to the 0x?000 range?
Otherwise these changes look good to me.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
