Re: [PATCH] fix ext3 mounts at 16T
Andreas Dilger <[email protected]> Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:18:55 -0600
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.file-systems.ext2.devel,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Aug 18, 2006 12:39 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ goal_in_my_reservation(struct ext3_reser > ext3_fsblk_t group_first_block, group_last_block; > > group_first_block = ext3_group_first_block_no(sb, group); > - group_last_block = group_first_block + EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1; > + group_last_block = group_first_block + (EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1); > > if ((rsv->_rsv_start > group_last_block) || > (rsv->_rsv_end < group_first_block)) > @@ -897,7 +897,7 @@ static int alloc_new_reservation(struct > spinlock_t *rsv_lock = &EXT3_SB(sb)->s_rsv_window_lock; > > group_first_block = ext3_group_first_block_no(sb, group); > - group_end_block = group_first_block + EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1; > + group_end_block = group_first_block + (EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1); > > if (grp_goal < 0) > start_block = group_first_block; I don't see how these can make a difference? Surely, if the intermediate sum overflows it will then underflow when "- 1" is done? Not that I mind, per-se, just curious why you think this fixes anything. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642