Re: [2.6 patch] fs/jbd/journal.c: cleanups

2008-02-18 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 06:49:36AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:12:29AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: Nack. I don't object to un-exporting journal_update_superblock(), because that is pretty internal, but the other functions are intended specifically for use by

[2.6 patch] make ext{3,4}_xattr_list() static

2008-02-17 Thread Adrian Bunk
This patch makes the needlessly global ext{3,4}_xattr_list() static. Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- fs/ext3/xattr.c |4 +++- fs/ext3/xattr.h |7 --- fs/ext4/xattr.c |4 +++- fs/ext4/xattr.h |7 --- 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 16 deletions

[2.6 patch] fs/jbd/journal.c: cleanups

2008-02-17 Thread Adrian Bunk
This patch contains the following cleanups: - make the following needlessly global function static: - journal_check_used_features() - remove the following unused EXPORT_SYMBOL's: - journal_set_features - journal_update_superblock Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This patch

ext4_mb_mark_diskspace_used() NULL dereference

2008-02-02 Thread Adrian Bunk
The Coverity checker spotted the following NULL dereference: -- snip -- ... static int ext4_mb_mark_diskspace_used(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac, handle_t *handle) { ... if (!bitmap_bh) goto out_err; ... out_err: sb-s_dirt =

Re: [2.6.24 patch] let EXT4DEV_FS depend on BROKEN

2008-01-02 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:41:57AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: On Jan 02, 2008 03:32 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels, but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel offered it - and that's

Re: [2.6.24 patch] let EXT4DEV_FS depend on BROKEN

2008-01-02 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 07:26:29PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote: El Wed, 2 Jan 2008 03:32:18 +0200, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels, but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel

[2.6.24 patch] let EXT4DEV_FS depend on BROKEN

2008-01-01 Thread Adrian Bunk
the depends on BROKEN line. Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- f778e1d046a3554ca15b8637afd0ffbf4790801c diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig index 487236c..d850725 100644 --- a/fs/Kconfig +++ b/fs/Kconfig @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ config EXT3_FS_SECURITY config EXT4DEV_FS tristate

[2.6 patch] ext4/super.c: fix #ifdef's

2007-11-05 Thread Adrian Bunk
This patch fixes the names of two variables in #ifdef's. Based on a report by Robert P. J. Day. Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- fs/ext4/super.c |4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) 44e9889e6a3952ea225704b2e494d31e00f34a6b diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c

[2.6 patch] make jbd/journal.c:__journal_abort_hard() static

2007-10-24 Thread Adrian Bunk
__journal_abort_hard() can now become static. Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- fs/jbd/journal.c|2 +- include/linux/jbd.h |1 - 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) ce452fbc5ebf8a4751183cfb731496c595b4ef6f diff --git a/fs/jbd/journal.c b/fs/jbd

ext4/balloc.c:read_block_bitmap(): inconsequent NULL checking

2007-10-19 Thread Adrian Bunk
Commit 7c9e69faa28027913ee059c285a5ea8382e24b5d results in the following inconsequent NULL checking in fs/ext4/balloc.c: -- snip -- ... struct buffer_head * read_block_bitmap(struct super_block *sb, unsigned int block_group) { ... if (!bh) ext4_error (sb, __FUNCTION__,

[RFC: 2.6 patch] make the *FS_SECURITY options no longer user visible

2007-07-29 Thread Adrian Bunk
to have the *FS_SECURITY user visible since we can perfectly determine automatically when turning them on makes sense. Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- fs/Kconfig | 82 + fs/xfs/Kconfig | 13 +-- 2 files changed, 25

[RFC: 2.6.16 patch] jbd: journal_dirty_data re-check for unmapped buffers

2007-04-03 Thread Adrian Bunk
This patch also seems to make sense for 2.6.16, or do I miss anything? TIA Adrian commit f58a74dca88d48b0669609b4957f3dd757bdc898 Author: Eric Sandeen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat Oct 28 10:38:27 2006 -0700 [PATCH] jbd: journal_dirty_data re-check for unmapped buffers When

[RFC: 2.6.16 patch] ext3: fix ext3 block bitmap leakage

2007-02-20 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 06:03:14PM -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote: This was dropped from 2.6.16-stable somehow: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/6/30/54 Thanks for forwarding it. This patch didn't went in this form into Linus' tree, I'd therefore like to get an ACK from the ext3 maintainers (Cc'ed)

2.6.20-rc5: known unfixed regressions (v3) (part 1)

2007-01-24 Thread Adrian Bunk
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc5 compared to 2.6.19 that are not yet fixed in Linus' tree. If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch of you caused a breakage or I'm

[2.6 patch] ext4_ext_split(): remove dead code

2006-11-06 Thread Adrian Bunk
The Coverity checker noted that this was dead code, since in all places above in this function, err is immediately checked. Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- linux-2.6/fs/ext4/extents.c.old 2006-11-06 11:02:09.0 +0100 +++ linux-2.6/fs/ext4/extents.c 2006-11-06 11:02