From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9582C43613 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 18:44:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 811322064B for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 18:44:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=pinc-software.de header.i=@pinc-software.de header.b="HDGKV1yS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726237AbfFUSoZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jun 2019 14:44:25 -0400 Received: from mo4-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([85.215.255.53]:16899 "EHLO mo4-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726066AbfFUSoY (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jun 2019 14:44:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1561142662; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=pinc-software.de; h=Message-Id:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From: Subject:Sender; bh=UipmIdlTqQ9PzhNLIRvIbIptfED4ilmnLRnrv6Son8s=; b=HDGKV1ySewXaPCd28lY71x5VWYgwg0myuryAJuG12bQEm7ry4r0LD9Aso2k39bOsM/ MbAtu1UFW0SiWYzUmOk8KyRyQQUeFyKdCVl7YX/oQueobxKfFcSuIimymlEpVnJXadXP Ha56t3yw8BvZGRPaVYms7PhYZo7wEbNQ/4fM8jntYd54gw3Va/oa5tkpMDjhKvI+/SfJ sG0IAL6V2CHhBheQw0kdFqcVRH64Qy/+cDcsfkRJBFc29luYR/TatNOVK65qpUeakKM7 lGpqVM2OkBeeqgXLOlJ54h8iEx1dzlEGZf08ql/oU19hhiEcFgt882553FYtUFGZI0xM z/wQ== X-RZG-AUTH: ":LXQBeUSIa/ZoedDIRs9YOPxY4/Y41LMYtYgA+S704F0fcsNycI1rqp7htm44FTK51uMij61Yqhw=" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from localhost by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 44.24 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id z087d6v5LIiMRc9 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (curve secp521r1 with 521 ECDH bits, eq. 15360 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate); Fri, 21 Jun 2019 20:44:22 +0200 (CEST) From: =?UTF-8?q?Axel=20D=C3=B6rfler?= To: Luis de Bethencourt , Salah Triki , Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: =?UTF-8?q?Axel=20D=C3=B6rfler?= Subject: [PATCH RESEND] befs: Removed incorrect check Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 20:44:18 +0200 Message-Id: <20190621184418.15614-1-axeld@pinc-software.de> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The relation between ag_shift and blocks_per_ag is a bit more complex, and also depends on the fs block size. Since blocks_per_ag is not even being used, simply omit the check. Signed-off-by: Axel Dörfler --- fs/befs/super.c | 7 ------- 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/befs/super.c b/fs/befs/super.c index 7c50025c99d8..29fa37557656 100644 --- a/fs/befs/super.c +++ b/fs/befs/super.c @@ -99,13 +99,6 @@ befs_check_sb(struct super_block *sb) return BEFS_ERR; } - - /* ag_shift also encodes the same information as blocks_per_ag in a - * different way, non-fatal consistency check - */ - if ((1 << befs_sb->ag_shift) != befs_sb->blocks_per_ag) - befs_error(sb, "ag_shift disagrees with blocks_per_ag."); - if (befs_sb->log_start != befs_sb->log_end || befs_sb->flags == BEFS_DIRTY) { befs_error(sb, "Filesystem not clean! There are blocks in the " -- 2.17.1