Re: [PATCH] UDF - use UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION instead of numbers

[Marcin Slusarz]

On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:40:08PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
> Jan, the patch is over current yours for_mm branch
> 
> Yep, i know it exceeds 80 column *but* it looks much better
> in this way ;)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6.git/fs/udf/inode.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.git.orig/fs/udf/inode.c	2008-04-12 22:53:15.000000000 +0400
> +++ linux-2.6.git/fs/udf/inode.c	2008-04-12 23:34:28.000000000 +0400
> @@ -1732,7 +1732,7 @@ int8_t udf_add_aext(struct inode *inode,
>  		}
>  		if (epos->bh) {
>  			if (!UDF_QUERY_FLAG(inode->i_sb, UDF_FLAG_STRICT) ||
> -			    UDF_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_udfrev >= 0x0201)
> +			    UDF_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_udfrev >= UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION)
>  				udf_update_tag(epos->bh->b_data, loffset);
>  			else
>  				udf_update_tag(epos->bh->b_data,
I think this patch is wrong. Right now it doesn't change anything, but in future
when someone will add support for writing UDF > 2.01 (and bump UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION)
it will break for filesystems written with udfrev >= 2.01 && udfrev < UDF_MAX_WRITE_VERSION.

Marcin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/