The check that determines whether an directory needs to be have an
index added to it depends on i_size. So move it after we have fixed
up i_size so that we reliable will rehash a directory that needs it,
even if its i_size field was originally incorrect. Otherwise, a
second run of e2fsck would be needed before the directory gets an
index added.
Thanks to Mikulas Patocka for providing a sample file system which
demonstrated this problem.
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx>
---
e2fsck/pass1.c | 10 ++++++----
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/e2fsck/pass1.c b/e2fsck/pass1.c
index f87d3ed..40948e7 100644
--- a/e2fsck/pass1.c
+++ b/e2fsck/pass1.c
@@ -1896,10 +1896,6 @@ static void check_blocks(e2fsck_t ctx, struct problem_context *pctx,
#endif
}
}
- if (ctx->dirs_to_hash && pb.is_dir &&
- !(inode->i_flags & EXT2_INDEX_FL) &&
- ((inode->i_size / fs->blocksize) >= 3))
- ext2fs_u32_list_add(ctx->dirs_to_hash, ino);
if (!pb.num_blocks && pb.is_dir) {
if (fix_problem(ctx, PR_1_ZERO_LENGTH_DIR, pctx)) {
@@ -1977,6 +1973,12 @@ static void check_blocks(e2fsck_t ctx, struct problem_context *pctx,
}
pctx->num = 0;
}
+
+ if (ctx->dirs_to_hash && pb.is_dir &&
+ !(inode->i_flags & EXT2_INDEX_FL) &&
+ ((inode->i_size / fs->blocksize) >= 3))
+ ext2fs_u32_list_add(ctx->dirs_to_hash, ino);
+
out:
if (dirty_inode)
e2fsck_write_inode(ctx, ino, inode, "check_blocks");
--
1.6.5.216.g5288a.dirty
--
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
