On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:06 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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));
>> }
Hmm, looks strikingly similar to what I posted nearly two months ago. :)
-Justin
--
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
