On 2018年01月26日 11:22, Gu Jinxiang wrote:
> Do a cleanup. Also make it consistent with kernel.
> Use fs_info instead of root for BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE, since
> maybe in some situation we do not know root, but just know fs_info.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gu Jinxiang <[email protected]>
> ---
>  convert/source-ext2.c     | 2 +-
>  convert/source-reiserfs.c | 2 +-
>  ctree.h                   | 2 +-
>  mkfs/main.c               | 4 ++--
>  4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/convert/source-ext2.c b/convert/source-ext2.c
> index e5c2a943..f5ecd8cf 100644
> --- a/convert/source-ext2.c
> +++ b/convert/source-ext2.c
> @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ static int ext2_create_file_extents(struct 
> btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
>               goto fail;
>       if ((convert_flags & CONVERT_FLAG_INLINE_DATA) && data.first_block == 0
>           && data.num_blocks > 0
> -         && inode_size <= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root)) {
> +         && inode_size <= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root->fs_info)) {
>               u64 num_bytes = data.num_blocks * sectorsize;
>               u64 disk_bytenr = data.disk_block * sectorsize;
>               u64 nbytes;
> diff --git a/convert/source-reiserfs.c b/convert/source-reiserfs.c
> index e3582bda..39d6f072 100644
> --- a/convert/source-reiserfs.c
> +++ b/convert/source-reiserfs.c
> @@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ static int reiserfs_convert_tail(struct 
> btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
>       u64 isize;
>       int ret;
>  
> -     if (length >= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root))
> +     if (length >= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root->fs_info))
>               return convert_direct(trans, root, objectid, inode, body,
>                                     length, offset, convert_flags);
>  
> diff --git a/ctree.h b/ctree.h
> index 9e9d3d22..ace93cc3 100644
> --- a/ctree.h
> +++ b/ctree.h
> @@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ struct btrfs_header {
>  #define __BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(bs) ((bs) - sizeof(struct btrfs_header))
>  #define BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(fs_info) \
>                               (__BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(fs_info->nodesize))
> -#define BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(r) (BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(r->fs_info) - \
> +#define BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(fs_info) (BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(fs_info) - 
> \
>                                       sizeof(struct btrfs_item) - \
>                                       sizeof(struct btrfs_file_extent_item))

I found this function is different from kernel one, not only in
declaration, but also result:

Kernel one is:
BTRFS_MAX_ITEM_SIZE(info) - BTRFS_FILE_EXTENT_INLINE_DATA_START

Which equals to:
BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(info) - sizeof(struct btrfs_item) -        
(offsetof(struct btrfs_file_extent_item, disk_bytenr))

However in btrfs-progs we have:
BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(fs_info) - sizeof(struct btrfs_item) -
sizeof(struct btrfs_file_extent_item).

Although the btrfs-progs definition is safer, but for sake of
consistency, it's better to copy the whole kernel definition here.

Thanks,
Qu

>  #define BTRFS_MAX_XATTR_SIZE(r)      (BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(r->fs_info) - \
> diff --git a/mkfs/main.c b/mkfs/main.c
> index d817ad8d..a301efc3 100644
> --- a/mkfs/main.c
> +++ b/mkfs/main.c
> @@ -498,7 +498,7 @@ static int fill_inode_item(struct btrfs_trans_handle 
> *trans,
>       }
>       if (S_ISREG(src->st_mode)) {
>               btrfs_set_stack_inode_size(dst, (u64)src->st_size);
> -             if (src->st_size <= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root))
> +             if (src->st_size <= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root->fs_info))
>                       btrfs_set_stack_inode_nbytes(dst, src->st_size);
>               else {
>                       blocks = src->st_size / sectorsize;
> @@ -686,7 +686,7 @@ static int add_file_items(struct btrfs_trans_handle 
> *trans,
>       if (st->st_size % sectorsize)
>               blocks += 1;
>  
> -     if (st->st_size <= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root)) {
> +     if (st->st_size <= BTRFS_MAX_INLINE_DATA_SIZE(root->fs_info)) {
>               char *buffer = malloc(st->st_size);
>  
>               if (!buffer) {
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to