On 02/17/2016 06:49 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 10:01:39AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
+ if (vol_args->flags & BTRFS_DEVICE_BY_ID) {
+ ret = btrfs_rm_device(root, NULL, vol_args->devid);
+ } else {
+ vol_args->name[BTRFS_PATH_NAME_MAX] = '\0';
BTRFS_SUBVOL_NAME_MAX
Spotted by Chris,
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:2703: warning: array subscript is above array bounds
my gcc version does not report that. Fixed and for-next pushed.
mine either. Sorry about that, thanks for the catch.
#define BTRFS_PATH_NAME_MAX 4087
#define BTRFS_SUBVOL_NAME_MAX 4039
I am fine with using BTRFS_SUBVOL_NAME_MAX for now. But theoretical
anomaly is that add-device code path will use BTRFS_PATH_NAME_MAX and
delete device will use BTRFS_SUBVOL_NAME_MAX.. its only theoretical
as most of the devices path are well below 4k IMO. So its a good
trade off than other solutions like.. (just for the understanding),
- Update add device code as well to use btrfs_ioctl_vol_args_v2
Which means we need to introduce BTRFS_IOC_ADD_DEV_V2 (system
PATH_MAX is 4096).
OR
- Create new btrfs_ioctl_vol_args_v3 with name[BTRFS_PATH_NAME_MAX+1]
(instead of name[BTRFS_SUBVOL_NAME_MAX+1]) and BTRFS_IOC_RM_DEV_V2
will be the only consumer of btrfs_ioctl_vol_args_v3 as of now.
Thanks, Anand
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
