[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dmmp2g7erhdwsg6tnzh3loobkuxytewrhulkepio7ek4tbjlci@padw5k3yvujw>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2024 14:55:49 +0800
From: Yiyang Wu <toolmanp@...p.cc>
To: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] erofs: refactor read_inode calling convention
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 01:52:59PM GMT, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Hi Yiyang,
>
> On 2024/9/2 12:50, Yiyang Wu wrote:
> How about not changing this, but add another if for this.
> if (S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode)) {
> err = erofs_fill_symlink(inode, kaddr, ofs);
> if (err)
> goto err_out;
> }
>
Yeah, i've decided on this before. But my initial intention is to avoid
another if statement. Sure, i will change this.
>
> if (inode->i_link)
>
> I'm not sure if `scripts/checkpatch.pl` still has the rule,
> but EROFS codebase don't compare against NULL.
>
Fixed.
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang
>
> > /*
> > * Return the DIO alignment restrictions if requested.
>
Some of the styling bugs are introduced by clang-format, it's included in root so i accidentally
formatted the code. I will fix them in next version.
Best Regards,
Yiyang Wu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists