From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7FAC433E1 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:56:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EFB62065C for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:56:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729622AbgG1M4o (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jul 2020 08:56:44 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:35466 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729234AbgG1M4o (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jul 2020 08:56:44 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 163D2AD3A; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by quack2.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 941B51E12C7; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:56:42 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:56:42 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: luomeng Cc: Jan Kara , Ted Tso , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Lukas Czerner Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] ext4: Check journal inode extents more carefully Message-ID: <20200728125642.GA23568@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20200727114429.1478-1-jack@suse.cz> <20200727114429.1478-4-jack@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Tue 28-07-20 17:10:28, luomeng wrote: > 在 2020/7/27 19:44, Jan Kara 写道: > > -int ext4_data_block_valid(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, ext4_fsblk_t start_blk, > > +int ext4_inode_block_valid(struct inode *inode, ext4_fsblk_t start_blk, > > unsigned int count) > > { > > struct ext4_system_blocks *system_blks; > > @@ -344,8 +346,8 @@ int ext4_data_block_valid(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, ext4_fsblk_t start_blk, > > */ > > rcu_read_lock(); > > system_blks = rcu_dereference(sbi->system_blks); > Because of a change in the function parameters，there is no 'sbi' declared. > So there will be a compile error: > > fs/ext4/block_validity.c: In function ‘ext4_inode_block_valid’: > fs/ext4/block_validity.c:345:32: error: ‘sbi’ undeclared (first use > in this function) > system_blks = rcu_dereference(sbi->system_blks); Hum, right. It gets fixed up in the following patch but since this patch is marked for stable, we better fix it. Thanks for noticing! Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR