| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Use the incore inode size in xfs_file_readdir() |
| From: | Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:22:55 +1100 |
| Cc: | xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20081204070827.GB29531@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <49377FBC.5020501@xxxxxxx> <20081204070827.GB29531@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | lachlan@xxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081105) |
Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:59:08PM +1100, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:We should be using the incore inode size here not the linux inode size. The incore inode size is always up to date for directories whereas the linux inode size is not updated for directories. We've hit assertions in xfs_bmap() and traced it back to the linux inode size being zero here but the incore size being correct.Heh. Looks good, but you can still call ->readdir with a 0 inode size, so you might want to check for that (actualyl I think other pathes are goign to take care of it, but..) What if we remove bufsize and pass PAGE_SIZE into xfs_readdir()? No need to worry about a 0 inode size. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Device loses barrier support (was: Fixed patch for simple barriers.), Mikulas Patocka |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Device loses barrier support, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Use the incore inode size in xfs_file_readdir(), Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Use the incore inode size in xfs_file_readdir(), Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |