[Top] [All Lists]

Fwd: [PATCH 2/2] xfs_spaceman: Accounting for AGFL blocks

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Fwd: [PATCH 2/2] xfs_spaceman: Accounting for AGFL blocks
From: Dhruvesh Rathore <adrscube@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:18:41 +0530
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=R7eR6zGutmMl026CbffXgIrtb7xZ5zba2HxzrzZiZ9c=; b=Ts5dwuT2gziQD9mzAYLFmBNX51uTR1UfH14blaihpf0feyYllYrfu4iwePiAyRB7Dk F1Ej/h3XQesr0m7MgFMM9YPaa6NXYVHjoOHPN1GOA/kfvOMnfeF85WBp2qnUgO/Vagt5 WD/9sJYAe2+G7wHTLE10ShRMH0E2Pg0Yx6ryZ6DOaLkA9EB1/CvDiNtvPuDsxm+xGI2O QR57CIxhzJIVV4yaZo2ghKR8UxVhLV2py09lV2wIDUluGbCKj3xwLXyh0Kp6Sw2UgrD1 /+XEG50SC+JUL4CoCqAyWArNjtZJKXLt2xc4/OeQ0Mc/Tpirdrrj+9IvQ/d2+0tvScek IOEg==
In-reply-to: <CALJmpHOFVZer7YL8Kek6jk2U8f7JyBrJknYzVhyowht_EGm7DQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <54c1c12e.230a460a.4729.11fc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150128015757.GT16552@dastard> <CALJmpHP=vjz_ZY9sFpW8k2Y7TL+sz-WyjPeMoy4sM6XDTt8MTQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150128205956.GA6282@dastard> <CALJmpHOFVZer7YL8Kek6jk2U8f7JyBrJknYzVhyowht_EGm7DQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:35:22PM +0530, ADRS PICT wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hmmm - I think something is still missing - what are the sagbno and
>> > eagbno parameters supposed to do?
>> Actually the parameters sagbno and eagbno are not needed in this
>> function and can be excluded.
> Why? Don't we still have to check the blocks found on the AGFL fll
> within the range requested by the user, like we do for every extent
> found in the btree?

We had felt that the range check is not needed as we are fetching block numbers
from the allocation group free block array by the function
And in xfs_alloc_read_agfl(), the error checking is done implicitly.

However, after you have raised this point, it is clear to us that performing a
range check will be a good way to catch and display a warning if the blocks are
out of range.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>