On Mar 03, 2008 14:40 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> large inodes with both fast symlinks and in-inode selinux attrs
> were not surviving moves via resize2fs.
>
> Somehow I missed that there was an ext2fs_get_next_inode_full...
> I think the below fix is correct, on top of my previous patch
> (and what is in e2fsprogs-1.40.7...)
>
> ------------------- changelog ----------------------
>
> Use ext2fs_get_next_inode_full() in resize2fs; previous attempt
> was not properly handling all cases, and was incorrectly setting
> i_extra_isize.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Index: e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
> ===================================================================
> --- e2fsprogs-1.40.7.orig/resize/resize2fs.c
> +++ e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
> @@ -1168,11 +1168,12 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
> * elsewhere in the inode table
> */
> while (1) {
> - retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode(scan, &ino, &inode);
> + retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode_full(scan, &ino, buf, inode_size);
> if (retval) goto errout;
> if (!ino)
> break;
>
> + memcpy(&inode, buf, sizeof(struct ext2_inode));
Should this be using "sizeof(struct ext2_inode)" or should it be using
"sb->s_inode_size" instead (extracted from the right struct of course)?
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, 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
