On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 7:46 PM, Andreas Dilger adilger@dilger.ca wrote:
diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c index 0c4c2201b3aa..2063d4e5ed08 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/super.c +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c @@ -312,6 +312,20 @@ void ext4_itable_unused_set(struct super_block *sb, bg->bg_itable_unused_hi = cpu_to_le16(count >> 16); }
+static void ext4_update_tstamp(__le32 *lo, __u8 *hi)
Would it be better to wrap this in a macro, something like:
#define ext4_update_tstamp(es, tstamp) \ __ext4_update_tstamp(&(es)->tstamp, &(es)->tstamp ## _hi) #define ext4_get_tstamp(es, tstamp) \ __ext4_get_tstamp(&(es)->tstamp, &(es)->tstamp ## _hi)
So that it can be used in the callers more easily:
ext4_update_tstamp(es, s_last_error_time); time = ext4_get_tstamp(es, s_last_error_time);
I generally try to avoid concatenating identifiers like this, as it makes it much harder to grep for where a particular symbol or struct member gets used.
+{
time64_t now = ktime_get_real_seconds();now = clamp_val(now, 0, 0xffffffffffull);Long strings of "0xfff..." are hard to get correct. This looks right, but it may be easier to be sure it is correct with something like:
/* timestamps have a 32-bit low field and 8-bit high field */ now = clamp_val(now, 0, (1ULL << 40) - 1);
Yes, good idea. I'm surprised we don't have a generic macro for that yet (or maybe I just couldn't find it)
@@ -249,6 +251,12 @@ static void *calc_ptr(struct ext4_attr *a, struct ext4_sb_info *sbi) return NULL; }
+static ssize_t print_time(char *buf, __le32 lo, __u8 hi)
It would probably be more consistent to name this "print_tstamp()" since it isn't strictly a "time" as one would expect.
Ok.
+{
return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%lld",((time64_t)hi << 32) + le32_to_cpu(lo));+}
Similarly, wrap this with:
#define print_tstamp(buf, es, tstamp) \ __print_tstamp(buf, &(es)->tstamp, &(es)->tstamp ## _hi)
Ok. I'll integrate all of the above and post as a non-RFC patch then after some testing.
Arnd