On Sep 01, 2009 16:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> ext2fs_open2() was only looking at s_blocks_count, and
> when it wrapped to a low number, it was failing the test of:
>
> fs->super->s_first_data_block >= fs->super->s_blocks_count
>
> which made the superblock look corrupt.
Is this the source of the "e2fsck is finding bad checksums" problem?
> Patch is against the pu branch
>
> Index: e2fsprogs/lib/ext2fs/openfs.c
> ===================================================================
> --- e2fsprogs.orig/lib/ext2fs/openfs.c
> +++ e2fsprogs/lib/ext2fs/openfs.c
> @@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ errcode_t ext2fs_open2(const char *name,
> blocks_per_group > EXT2_MAX_BLOCKS_PER_GROUP(fs->super) ||
> fs->inode_blocks_per_group > EXT2_MAX_INODES_PER_GROUP(fs->super) ||
> EXT2_DESC_PER_BLOCK(fs->super) == 0 ||
> - fs->super->s_first_data_block >= fs->super->s_blocks_count) {
> + fs->super->s_first_data_block >= ext2fs_blocks_count(fs->super)) {
I would strongly suggest to replace the declaration of "s_blocks_count"
with "s_blocks_count_lo" (and similar for every other split value), so
that we catch all instances of this type of bug.
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
