The break was in front of the nr = i assignment so that was never hit.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter erro...@gmail.com
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
index 0d1d966..ceb8ad2 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
@@ -3453,8 +3453,8 @@ int
If we meet a bad extent type, find_updated_files is going
to print random things. Better warn the user about what
happens.
This fixes:
btrfs-list.c: Dans la fonction «find_updated_files» :
btrfs-list.c:668: attention : «disk_offset» may be used uninitialized in this
function
btrfs-list.c:668:
This fixes:
btrfs-list.c: Dans la fonction «ino_resolve» :
btrfs-list.c:511: attention : déclaration implicite de la fonction « «strndup» »
btrfs-list.c:511: attention : incompatible implicit declaration of built-in
function «strndup»
make: *** [btrfs-list.o] Erreur 1
and:
btrfs.c: Dans la
Hi,
on 2010-6-28 19:17, Dan Carpenter wrote:
The break was in front of the nr = i assignment so that was never hit.
This bug has been fixed a month ago, and the patch has been merged into the
btrfs-unstable tree.
http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfsm=127434036913484w=2
Thanks
Miao
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 08:57:54AM +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
Hi,
on 2010-6-28 19:17, Dan Carpenter wrote:
The break was in front of the nr = i assignment so that was never hit.
This bug has been fixed a month ago, and the patch has been merged into the
btrfs-unstable tree.
This was one
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Daniel Kozlowski
dan.kozlow...@gmail.com wrote:
Sean Bartell wingedtachikoma at gmail.com writes:
Is there a more aggressive filesystem restorer than btrfsck? It simply
gives up immediately with the following error:
btrfsck: disk-io.c:739: open_ctree_fd:
