Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751049AbWHRXTE (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 19:19:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751580AbWHRXTE (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 19:19:04 -0400 Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:31971 "EHLO mail.clusterfs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751049AbWHRXTA (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 19:19:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:18:55 -0600 From: Andreas Dilger To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Mingming Cao , sho@tnes.nec.co.jp, ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] [PATCH] fix ext3 mounts at 16T Message-ID: <20060818231855.GW6634@schatzie.adilger.int> Mail-Followup-To: Eric Sandeen , Mingming Cao , sho@tnes.nec.co.jp, ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20060818181516sho@rifu.tnes.nec.co.jp> <44E5F9F0.6030805@us.ibm.com> <44E5FB5D.60403@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44E5FB5D.60403@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-GPG-Key: 1024D/0D35BED6 X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7A37 5D79 BF1B CECA D44F 8A29 A488 39F5 0D35 BED6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1422 Lines: 35 On Aug 18, 2006 12:39 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ goal_in_my_reservation(struct ext3_reser > ext3_fsblk_t group_first_block, group_last_block; > > group_first_block = ext3_group_first_block_no(sb, group); > - group_last_block = group_first_block + EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1; > + group_last_block = group_first_block + (EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1); > > if ((rsv->_rsv_start > group_last_block) || > (rsv->_rsv_end < group_first_block)) > @@ -897,7 +897,7 @@ static int alloc_new_reservation(struct > spinlock_t *rsv_lock = &EXT3_SB(sb)->s_rsv_window_lock; > > group_first_block = ext3_group_first_block_no(sb, group); > - group_end_block = group_first_block + EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1; > + group_end_block = group_first_block + (EXT3_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(sb) - 1); > > if (grp_goal < 0) > start_block = group_first_block; I don't see how these can make a difference? Surely, if the intermediate sum overflows it will then underflow when "- 1" is done? Not that I mind, per-se, just curious why you think this fixes anything. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/