On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 08:06:25AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Since we're following the name size limit of linux, just use NAME_MAX. > > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <w...@suse.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > index 53af9f5253f4..5ab6d1f6e055 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ struct btrfs_ordered_sum; > * we can actually store much bigger names, but lets not confuse the rest > * of linux > */ > -#define BTRFS_NAME_LEN 255 > +#define BTRFS_NAME_LEN NAME_MAX
While the values are the same, the symbolic names have a slightly different meaning. NAME_MAX is from the public API, BTRFS_NAME_LEN is defined as btrfs limit, and de facto part of the on-disk format. These are independent, although compatible for all practical purposes. I would not conflate the two in the define, the comment could be updated to document that better though.
