On 2018/9/13 下午8:05, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> Instead of having another top-level if which checks for
> 'extent_num_bytes != item_inline_len' only if we are !compressed, just
> move the 'if' inside the 'else' branch of the first top-level if, since
> it has already checked for !compressed or not. No functional changes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nbori...@suse.com>

Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <w...@suse.com>

Thanks,
Qu

> ---
>  check/mode-lowmem.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/check/mode-lowmem.c b/check/mode-lowmem.c
> index 48c1537e7440..3a6fbb33c858 100644
> --- a/check/mode-lowmem.c
> +++ b/check/mode-lowmem.c
> @@ -1860,19 +1860,20 @@ static int check_file_extent_inline(struct btrfs_root 
> *root,
>                               err |= FILE_EXTENT_ERROR;
>               }
>  
> -     }
> -     if (!compressed && extent_num_bytes != item_inline_len) {
> -             error(
> +
> +             if (extent_num_bytes != item_inline_len) {
> +                     error(
>  "root %llu EXTENT_DATA[%llu %llu] wrong inline size, have: %llu, expected: 
> %u",
>                               root->objectid, fkey.objectid, fkey.offset,
>                               extent_num_bytes, item_inline_len);
> -             if (repair) {
> -                     ret = repair_inline_ram_bytes(root, path,
> -                                                   &extent_num_bytes);
> -                     if (ret)
> +                     if (repair) {
> +                             ret = repair_inline_ram_bytes(root, path,
> +                                                           
> &extent_num_bytes);
> +                             if (ret)
> +                                     err |= FILE_EXTENT_ERROR;
> +                     } else {
>                               err |= FILE_EXTENT_ERROR;
> -             } else {
> -                     err |= FILE_EXTENT_ERROR;
> +                     }
>               }
>       }
>       *end += extent_num_bytes;
> 

Reply via email to