linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] fix debugfs output for flex

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101206031658.GH4273@thunk.org>
Date:	Sun, 5 Dec 2010 22:16:58 -0500
From:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...cle.com>
Cc:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix debugfs output for flex_bg bitmap offsets

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 05:33:27PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2010-11-25, at 12:09, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > ...with patch this time...
> 
> Attached is an updated patch that makes the output a bit more
> verbose (to avoid line wraps) and doesn't fail the m_raid_opts test
> (which complains when "(+0)" is printed for each inode table).

Every time you write code of the form:

      if (block >= first_block + !!itable && ...)

Gcc kills a kitten.  Please, think of the kittens....

I rewrote that code as follows:  

	if ((block >= first_block) && (block <= last_block)) {
		if (itable && block == first_block)
			return;
		printf(" (+%u)", (unsigned)(block - first_block));
	} else if ...


I also changed the output to use "(bg #16 + 4)" since I think it's a
bit easier to understand than "(grp 16+4)".

Otherwise, I've added it to the e2fsprogs maint branch, thanks.

	   	      	    		  - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html