From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: ubifs: remove always-false check
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 18:29:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220811162930.bicu6tpzldcwrc2d@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220811135804.271071-1-a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2168 bytes --]
Hello Ahmad,
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 03:58:04PM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> GCC correctly warns that two bit wide compr_type can't
> exceed or be equal to UBIFS_COMPR_TYPES_CNT (== 4).
>
> Remove the check. The check is there in the kernel as well,
> but the warning is disabled there.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> fs/ubifs/super.c | 5 -----
> 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/super.c b/fs/ubifs/super.c
> index b48e21fae636..6a0074bd1a5c 100644
> --- a/fs/ubifs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/super.c
> @@ -86,11 +86,6 @@ static int validate_inode(struct ubifs_info *c, const struct inode *inode)
> return 1;
> }
>
> - if (ui->compr_type >= UBIFS_COMPR_TYPES_CNT) {
> - ubifs_err(c, "unknown compression type %d", ui->compr_type);
> - return 2;
> - }
> -
I taked to Richard Weinberger about this check in the kernel via irc:
1656326473 < ukleinek> derRichard: I don't feel like increasing my
kernel patch count, so I'm just reporting here:
https://lore.barebox.org/20220624081628.GD1615@pengutronix.de
1656326538 <@derRichard> oh
1656326817 <@derRichard> yeah looks like we need to enlarge struct
ubifs_inode
1656327489 < sha> derRichard: Only when the next compression type comes
1656327499 < sha> derRichard: For now it's enough to remove the check
1656328989 <@derRichard> sha: yeah, i'd rather keep the check.
1656329007 <@derRichard> if we add a new type we'll forget to re-add the
check for sure
1656330552 < sha> derRichard: Ah, I thought the on-flash format has two
bits, but it's only the in-memory structures. Then we can change
the width to 3 bits without problem
1656331100 <@derRichard> exactly
1656331149 <@derRichard> i think it is anyway time ot reevaluate the
bitfields in struct ubifs_inode, i'm not so sure whether they
really pay off these days
Given the kernel wants to keep the check, maybe it's easier to keep it
in barebox, too?!
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-11 16:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-11 13:58 Ahmad Fatoum
2022-08-11 16:29 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2022-09-13 8:37 ` Sascha Hauer
2022-09-13 8:47 ` Ahmad Fatoum
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220811162930.bicu6tpzldcwrc2d@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox