Hi, Again, it doesn't make sense why we should cpu_to_le32(x) + cpu_to_le32(1) instead of cpu_to_le32(x + 1).
What is the problem? 2013-06-28 (금), 13:12 +0800, Wang Sheng-Hui: > The raw_node will take 1 blk itself, and its next blk addr should be +1. > > Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <[email protected]> > --- > mkfs/f2fs_format.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mkfs/f2fs_format.c b/mkfs/f2fs_format.c > index 06771ff..f00ba04 100644 > --- a/mkfs/f2fs_format.c > +++ b/mkfs/f2fs_format.c > @@ -744,7 +744,7 @@ static int f2fs_write_root_inode(void) > raw_node->footer.next_blkaddr = cpu_to_le32( > le32_to_cpu(super_block.main_blkaddr) + > config.cur_seg[CURSEG_HOT_NODE] * > - config.blks_per_seg + 1); > + config.blks_per_seg) + cpu_to_le32(1); > > raw_node->i.i_mode = cpu_to_le16(0x41ed); > raw_node->i.i_links = cpu_to_le32(2); -- Jaegeuk Kim Samsung ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
