On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Jan Kara <j...@suse.cz> wrote: > I agree with moving ext4_xattr_rehash_entry() out of ext4_xattr_rehash(). > However how about just keeping ext4_xattr_rehash() in > ext4_xattr_block_set() (so that you don't have to pass aditional argument > to ext4_xattr_set_entry()) and calling ext4_xattr_rehash_entry() when > i->value != NULL? That would seem easier and cleaner as well...
The is_block parameter is also used to decide whether block reserve check should be performed: @@ -1500,8 +1502,8 @@ static int ext4_xattr_set_entry(struct ext4_xattr_info *i, * attribute block so that a long value does not occupy the * whole space and prevent futher entries being added. */ - if (ext4_has_feature_ea_inode(inode->i_sb) && new_size && - (s->end - s->base) == i_blocksize(inode) && + if (ext4_has_feature_ea_inode(inode->i_sb) && + new_size && is_block && (min_offs + old_size - new_size) < EXT4_XATTR_BLOCK_RESERVE(inode)) { ret = -ENOSPC; Because of that, I think moving ext4_xattr_rehash to caller makes it bit more complicated. Let me know if you disagree. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list Jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion