From: jon ernst Subject: Re: xfstest-bld generic/018 fails due to e4defrag issue Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 23:10:47 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20140409220320.GC15303@thunk.org> <20140410135637.GC15925@thunk.org> <20140410184215.GA9171@birch.djwong.org> <20140411030739.GD23620@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List" To: "Theodore Ts'o" Return-path: Received: from mail-qc0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]:42807 "EHLO mail-qc0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754543AbaDKDKs (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2014 23:10:48 -0400 Received: by mail-qc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id r5so5373947qcx.18 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 20:10:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140411030739.GD23620@thunk.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:42:15AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> >> From a quick visual inspection and a sparse bitwise check, e4defrag looks 64bit >> clean. > > Thanks for checking! I've applied Jon's patch. > > - Ted Thanks Ted, I have also checked e4defrag.c with eyeballs. All physical blocks are represented by 64bit.