Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
The below might help.
Indeed it does (with Martin's E2FSBLK warning fix),
seems to be running well on all machines now.
(Of course, my ext2_fsblk_t ext2_new_blocks() notion did not pan out,
for same reason as the original: that ret_block was expected signed.)
Whilst I've got all the smart people looking at this ...
/*max window size: 1024(direct blocks) + 3([t,d]indirect blocks) */
#define EXT2_MAX_RESERVE_BLOCKS 1027
Is that wrong? If it's meaning one triple, one double, and one single
indirect block, surely it can span a boundary, so we need (potentially)
two of each?
M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
