On May 14, 2007 14:21 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On May 14, 2007 13:05 +0200, Cordenner jean noel wrote: > > @@ -331,12 +331,13 @@ > > } osd2; /* OS dependent 2 */ > > __le16 i_extra_isize; > > __le16 i_pad1; > > + __le32 i_disk_version_hi; > > No, this is not correct. There are already several other fields here > (nanosecond ctime, mtime, atime, crtime (creation time)) so you need > to use the correct reserved field for this. > > __u16 i_extra_isize; > __u16 i_pad1; > __u32 i_ctime_extra; /* extra Change time (nsec << 2 | epoch) */ > __u32 i_mtime_extra; /* extra Modification time (nsec << 2 | epoch)*/ > __u32 i_atime_extra; /* extra Access time (nsec << 2 | epoch) */ > __u32 i_crtime; /* File creation time */ > __u32 i_crtime_extra; /* extra File creation time (nsec << 2 |epoch)*/ Sorry, I meant to add (before hitting send :-) that the field after i_crtime_extra is supposed to be "i_disk_version_hi". See the patch from Kalpak Shah "[RFC] 64-bit inode version" which also handles the case for expanding i_extra_isize to cover the needed extra fields if i_extra_isize is not large enough. That patch didn't include the 64-bit i_version_hi yet, because there wasn't yet agreement at that time if the iversion_hi should be allocated separately, but that was since decided. Without that patch, your patch will possibly corrupt the extended attributes by just overwriting i_disk_version_hi while ignoring the actual value of i_extra_isize. This would clobber the EA magic and result in loss of all EAs in that inode. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
