On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 08:10:31PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Please try to rediff it against the CVS tree at oss.sgi.com (there's not
> much differences, it's just the development tree), and then submit it to
> the list.
Ok, done (I hope the format is ok).
Notes about the patch:
- I left the printk's I used in place, maybe they help with
understanding the code;
- the xfs_inobtsize and xfs_alloc_btsize are called recursivelly, I
don't know if this can be a problem with stack usage; however, it was
the simplest way at the moment and the max depth is equal to the max
depth of the btrees;
- almost all the code is based on guesswork and looking at the xfs
kernel & userspace code; I have the most doubts about the usage of
xfs_alloc_vextent and the parameters I filled its argument with;
If anything is unclear, please ask for more information.
> Yeah, that sounds a little fishy. I'll take a look at the patch once
> you'll post it.
Ok, thanks a lot!
Description: Text document
Description: Digital signature