Ok, the code is not very clear, but now I can see it. p_block is
actually misused here to store the number of indexes in the current
node while diving into the tree. Then on the way up, we are checking
that to see if the eh_entries changed or not (which is indicating
that something has been freed deeper in the tree).

True, p_block is misused. We tried to fix the problem with
minimum code change.

That said, it makes sense to set it before the loop itself because
we are actually skipping the path construction while diving into
the tree since patch is already initialized and we're starting
walking back from 'depth' up in this case. So the patch seems fine.
Thanks for catching it and fixing it.

You can add

Reviewed-by: Lukas Czerner <redacted>

Thanks for your review.

quoted

quoted

Note: there are some indent problems in your patch, like for example
this:

+                       path[k].p_block =
+                       le16_to_cpu(path[k].p_hdr->eh_entries)+1;

Before submitting the patch, I run checkpatch.pl with --strict option.
It did'nt show any error or warning. Should I re-submit
the patch with an extra tab before the second line? The call is yours.

checkpatch.pl does not catch everything. Just look at how wrapping
of long lines is done in the code, there are plenty of examples.

True again. I will resend patch with proper indentation.

quoted

quoted

Anyway, what do you think about the modification ?

Also there is 1 modification missing from your patch.
    ext4_ext_drop_refs(path);
        kfree(path);
+       path = NULL;
        if (err == -EAGAIN)
                goto again;
If path is not set to NULL, it will crash in xfstest #13. Ted has
already reported it.

Right, I've probably used the old patch as an example.

Thanks!
-Lukas

Thanks,
Ashish