From: Valerie Aurora Subject: Re: spatch for 64-bit e2fsprogs (was Re: Fix device too big bug in mainline?) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 18:56:24 -0400 Message-ID: <20090803225624.GC9324@shell> References: <20090730215302.GA31141@shell> <20090802002833.GB8680@mit.edu> <20090802022209.GC8680@mit.edu> <20090803202740.GE10853@shell> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Eric Sandeen , Ric Wheeler To: Theodore Tso , Julia Lawall Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:37513 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753321AbZHCW41 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Aug 2009 18:56:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090803202740.GE10853@shell> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 04:27:40PM -0400, Valerie Aurora wrote: > On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 10:22:09PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > > > > I also would greatly prefer it if people who submit patches to me obey > > basic patch and code formatting guidelines. Things like this are > > really uncool: > > > > - fs->group_desc[i].bg_free_blocks_count = > > - free_array[i]; > > + ext2fs_bg_free_blocks_count_set(fs, i, free_array[i]) > > + ; > > Ah, that's left over from an spatch bug that Julia Lawall (cc'd) > kindly fixed immediately after I reported it. It won't happen if you > use the current spatch. My apologies for missing this one during > review! > > I think spatch could probably also wrap lines automatically when > making semantic patches - Julia? > > I'm curious what you think of this proposal: Redo all the foo() -> > foo2() patches in the entire 64-bit series as a semantic patches. > This would also fix this kind of cut and paste bug: > > + ext2fs_bg_flag_clear (fs, i, EXT2_BG_BLOCK_UNINIT); > + ext2fs_bg_flag_clear (fs, i, EXT2_BG_INODE_UNINIT); > > I fixed several of these in the existing 64-bit code when I took it > over, so I assume more lurk undiscovered and would be revealed if we > redid them with spatch. > > Julia, would you and/or your students be interested in helping? I > think you're running out of bugs in the kernel and e2fsprogs would be > another excellent showcase for spatch/Coccinelle. :) I just remembered another reason to convert to spatch: For various reasons, I ignored several parts of e2fsprogs while doing the 64-bit conversion. Some of those should remain unconverted (dead code or 32-bit only code) but others should be converted. For example, I found some unconverted block group descriptor references in resize2fs last week - I remember having some reason for doing it at the time but I don't recall what it was now since it's been a few months. Sorry! -VAL