Messages in this thread | | | From | Daeho Jeong <> | Date | Wed, 4 Oct 2023 16:37:20 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] f2fs-tools: use proper address entry count for direct nodes |
| |
On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 4:26 PM Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 10/03, Daeho Jeong wrote: > > From: Daeho Jeong <daehojeong@google.com> > > > > For direct nodes, we have to use DEF_ADDRS_PER_BLOCK. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <daehojeong@google.com> > > --- > > fsck/fsck.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fsck/fsck.c b/fsck/fsck.c > > index 78ffdb6..56a7d31 100644 > > --- a/fsck/fsck.c > > +++ b/fsck/fsck.c > > @@ -2894,7 +2894,7 @@ static void fsck_failed_reconnect_file_dnode(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, > > fsck->chk.valid_blk_cnt--; > > f2fs_clear_main_bitmap(sbi, ni.blk_addr); > > > > - for (i = 0; i < ADDRS_PER_BLOCK(&node->i); i++) { > > + for (i = 0; i < DEF_ADDRS_PER_BLOCK; i++) { > > It seems we need to use the inode block passing by fsck_failed_reconnect_file().
This function is for direct nodes. Is it correct to use inode block here?
> > > addr = le32_to_cpu(node->dn.addr[i]); > > if (!addr) > > continue; > > 3012 fsck->chk.valid_blk_cnt--; > 3013 if (addr == NEW_ADDR) > > And, we also need to skip if addr == COMPRESS_ADDR here? > > 3014 continue; > 3015 f2fs_clear_main_bitmap(sbi, addr); > 3016 } > > > -- > > 2.42.0.582.g8ccd20d70d-goog
| |