> On 2020/09/12 14:01, Sungjong Seo wrote: > >> Remove 'rwoffset' in exfat_inode_info and replace it with the > >> parameter(cpos) of exfat_readdir. > >> Since rwoffset of is referenced only by exfat_readdir, it is not > >> necessary a exfat_inode_info's member. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Tetsuhiro Kohada <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> fs/exfat/dir.c | 16 ++++++---------- > >> fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h | 2 -- > >> fs/exfat/file.c | 2 -- > >> fs/exfat/inode.c | 3 --- > >> fs/exfat/super.c | 1 - > >> 5 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/fs/exfat/dir.c b/fs/exfat/dir.c index > >> a9b13ae3f325..fa5bb72aa295 100644 > >> --- a/fs/exfat/dir.c > >> +++ b/fs/exfat/dir.c > > [snip] > >> sector @@ -262,13 +260,11 @@ static int exfat_iterate(struct file > >> *filp, struct dir_context *ctx) > >> goto end_of_dir; > >> } > >> > >> - cpos = EXFAT_DEN_TO_B(ei->rwoffset); > >> - > >> if (!nb->lfn[0]) > >> goto end_of_dir; > >> > >> i_pos = ((loff_t)ei->start_clu << 32) | > >> - ((ei->rwoffset - 1) & 0xffffffff); > >> + (EXFAT_B_TO_DEN(cpos-1) & 0xffffffff); > > > > Need to fix the above line to be: > > (EXFAT_B_TO_DEN(cpos)-1)) & 0xffffffff); > > > Here, we simply converted so that the calculation results would be the > same. > But after reading it carefully again, I noticed. > - Why use the previous entry? > - Why does cpos point to stream dir-entry in entry-set? > > For the former, there is no need to "++dentry" in exfat_readdir(). > For the latter, I think cpos should point to the next to current entry-set. > > I'll make V2 considering these. > How do you think?
The latter looks better. > > BR > --- > Tetsuhiro Kohada <[email protected]>
