On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 09:36:43PM +0300, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > ... > > @@ -801,6 +800,15 @@ static struct dentry *btrfs_mount(struct > > file_system_type *fs_type, int flags, > > fs_info->fs_devices = fs_devices; > > tree_root->fs_info = fs_info; > > > > + fs_info->super_copy = kzalloc(sizeof(struct btrfs_super_block), > > + GFP_NOFS); > > + fs_info->super_for_commit = kzalloc(sizeof(struct btrfs_super_block), > > + GFP_NOFS); > > In light of > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/11004/focus=11038 > what do you think of allocating BTRFS_SUPER_INFO_SIZE instead of sizeof?
that it's absolutely correct fix. Although allocator would provide a 4kb buffer (slab) and the rest of the 2.5-4kb space would remain untouched, this could bite later, when this assumption would not hold. Passed through xfstests and a few fs_mark rounds. Patch updated in git://repo.or.cz/linux-2.6/btrfs-unstable.git #cleanups david -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
