ck ya wrote:
> I compiled the latest e2fsprogs, and do fsck with -nvf on my ext4 file system.
> It showed
> Inode 18, i_blocks is 17179870744, should be 17179870744. Fix? no
> The i_blocks is the same.
>
> I found ext2fs_inode_i_blocks() has problem. The function check
> EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_HUGE_FILE with "s_feature_compat". It should
> be "s_feature_ro_compat".
Seems right to me, if you add [PATCH] to the subject emails like
these, and add:
Signed-off-by: ck ya <ykwan0201@xxxxxxxxx>
---
after the patch,
it'd be ideal.
Thanks,
-Eric
> Thanks.
>
> diff --git a/lib/ext2fs/blknum.c b/lib/ext2fs/blknum.c
> index a48b696..d67c6ec 100644
> --- a/lib/ext2fs/blknum.c
> +++ b/lib/ext2fs/blknum.c
> @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ blk64_t ext2fs_inode_data_blocks2(ext2_filsys fs,
> struct ext2_inode *inode)
> {
> return (inode->i_blocks |
> - ((fs->super->s_feature_incompat &
> + ((fs->super->s_feature_ro_incompat &
> EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_HUGE_FILE) ?
> (__u64) inode->osd2.linux2.l_i_blocks_hi << 32 : 0)) -
> (inode->i_file_acl ? fs->blocksize >> 9 : 0);
> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ blk64_t ext2fs_inode_i_blocks(ext2_filsys fs,
> struct ext2_inode *inode)
> {
> return (inode->i_blocks |
> - ((fs->super->s_feature_incompat &
> + ((fs->super->s_feature_ro_incompat &
> EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_HUGE_FILE) ?
> (__u64)inode->osd2.linux2.l_i_blocks_hi << 32 : 0));
> }
> --
> 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
--
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
