From: Toshiyuki Okajima Subject: [Patch] mistaken ext4_inode_bitmap for ext4_block_bitmap Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:24:10 +0900 Message-ID: <468094EA.60609@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: sct@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, adilger@clusterfs.com Return-path: Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:52285 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750897AbXFZEY4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:24:56 -0400 Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Hi. I found an obvious mistake in ext4_new_blocks(). I made a fix patch for it. Please confirm it. This patch is for 2.6.22-rc5. --- In ext4_new_blocks(), one of two ext4_block_bitmap() calls should be ext4_inode_bitmap() call. It is not harmful in normal processing, but it should be fixed. Signed-off-by: Toshiyuki Okajima --- fs/ext4/balloc.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- linux-2.6.22-rc5.org/fs/ext4/balloc.c 2007-06-17 11:09:12.000000000 +0900 +++ linux-2.6.22-rc5/fs/ext4/balloc.c 2007-06-22 13:50:22.000000000 +0900 @@ -1585,7 +1585,7 @@ allocated: ret_block = grp_alloc_blk + ext4_group_first_block_no(sb, group_no); if (in_range(ext4_block_bitmap(sb, gdp), ret_block, num) || - in_range(ext4_block_bitmap(sb, gdp), ret_block, num) || + in_range(ext4_inode_bitmap(sb, gdp), ret_block, num) || in_range(ret_block, ext4_inode_table(sb, gdp), EXT4_SB(sb)->s_itb_per_group) || in_range(ret_block + num - 1, ext4_inode_table(sb, gdp),