Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 13 Apr 2008 13:50:29 +0200 | From | Marcin Slusarz <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] UDF - use UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION instead of numbers |
| |
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:40:08PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> > --- > > Jan, the patch is over current yours for_mm branch > > Yep, i know it exceeds 80 column *but* it looks much better > in this way ;) > > Index: linux-2.6.git/fs/udf/inode.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.git.orig/fs/udf/inode.c 2008-04-12 22:53:15.000000000 +0400 > +++ linux-2.6.git/fs/udf/inode.c 2008-04-12 23:34:28.000000000 +0400 > @@ -1732,7 +1732,7 @@ int8_t udf_add_aext(struct inode *inode, > } > if (epos->bh) { > if (!UDF_QUERY_FLAG(inode->i_sb, UDF_FLAG_STRICT) || > - UDF_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_udfrev >= 0x0201) > + UDF_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_udfrev >= UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION) > udf_update_tag(epos->bh->b_data, loffset); > else > udf_update_tag(epos->bh->b_data, I think this patch is wrong. Right now it doesn't change anything, but in future when someone will add support for writing UDF > 2.01 (and bump UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION) it will break for filesystems written with udfrev >= 2.01 && udfrev < UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION.
Marcin
| |