mm/swapfile.c: do not skip lowest_bit in scan_swap_map() scan loop

In the second half of scan_swap_map()'s scan loop, offset is set to
si->lowest_bit and then incremented before entering the loop for the
first time, causing si->swap_map[si->lowest_bit] to be skipped.

Signed-off-by: Jamie Liu <jamieliu@google.com>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>
Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
ext4: remove unused ac_ex_scanned

When looking at a bug report with:

> kernel: EXT4-fs: 0 scanned, 0 found

I thought wow, 0 scanned, that's odd?  But it's not odd; it's printing
a variable that is initialized to 0 and never touched again.

It's never been used since the original merge, so I don't really even
know what the original intent was, either.

If anyone knows how to hook it up, speak now via patch, otherwise just
yank it so it's not making a confusing situation more confusing in
kernel logs.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
ext4: don't calculate total xattr header size unless needed

The function ext4_expand_extra_isize_ea() doesn't need the size of all
of the extended attribute headers.  So if we don't calculate it when
it is unneeded, it we can skip some undeeded memory references, and as
a bonus, we eliminate some kvetching by static code analysis tools.

Addresses-Coverity-Id: #741291

Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
ext4: address a benign compiler warning

When !defined(CONFIG_EXT4_DEBUG), mb_debug() should be defined as a
no_printk() statement instead of an empty statement in order to suppress
the following compiler warning:

fs/ext4/mballoc.c: In function ‘ext4_mb_cleanup_pa’:
fs/ext4/mballoc.c:2659:47: warning: suggest braces around empty body in an ‘if’ statement [-Wempty-body]
   mb_debug(1, "mballoc: %u PAs left\n", count);

Signed-off-by: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
ext4: remove unreachable code in ext4_can_extents_be_merged()

Commit ec22ba8e ("ext4: disable merging of uninitialized extents")
ensured that if either extent under consideration is uninit, we
decline to merge, and immediately return.

But right after that test, we test again for an uninit
extent; we can never hit this.  So just remove the impossible
test and associated variable.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Reviewed-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
ext4: remove unreachable code after ext4_can_extents_be_merged()

Commit ec22ba8e ("ext4: disable merging of uninitialized extents")
ensured that if either extent under consideration is uninit, we
decline to merge, and ext4_can_extents_be_merged() returns false.

So there is no need for the caller to then test whether the
extent under consideration is unitialized; if it were, we
wouldn't have gotten that far.

The comments were also inaccurate; ext4_can_extents_be_merged()
no longer XORs the states, it fails if *either* is uninit.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Reviewed-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
Signed-off-by: Chet Kener <Cl3Kener@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	fs/ext4/extents.c