On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 01:34:44AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Index: e2fsprogs-1.40.5/e2fsck/super.c
> ===================================================================
> @@ -626,6 +631,50 @@ void check_super_block(e2fsck_t ctx)
...
> + if (!ext2fs_group_desc_csum_verify(sb, i, gd)) {
> + if (fix_problem(ctx, PR_0_GDT_CSUM, &pctx)) {
> + gd->bg_flags &= ~(EXT2_BG_BLOCK_UNINIT |
> + EXT2_BG_INODE_UNINIT);
> + gd->bg_itable_unused = 0;
> + }
> + ext2fs_unmark_valid(fs);
> + }
> +
...
> +
> + gd->bg_checksum = ext2fs_group_desc_csum(fs->super, i, gd);
This last looks horribly wrong. check_super_block() is merely
supposed to check to see if the superblock and block gorup descriptos
looks OK, and to mark the filesystem as invalid if anything looks
insane. It should *not* modifying the block group descriptor, and it
certainly should not be doing so without first checking to see if the
filesystem has been opened read/only or calling
ext2fs_mark_super_dirty(fs) after making a change (that it shouldn't
do).
In fact there already is a check to see if the checksum has verified
correctly (see the first part of the patch which I quoted), so I think
the best thing to do is to remove that last bit. I'm not sure why
it's there at all, in fact....
- Ted
--
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
