When libext2fs allocates/deletes an extent leaf, the i_blocks value is incremented/decremented by fs->blocksize / 512. This is incorrect in case of bigalloc. The correct way here is to use cluster_size / 512. The problem is seen if we try to create a large inode using libext2fs (say using ext2fs_block_iterate3()) on a bigalloc filesystem. fsck catches this and complains. Signed-off-by: Aditya Kali <adityakali@xxxxxxxxxx> --- lib/ext2fs/extent.c | 7 +++++-- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/ext2fs/extent.c b/lib/ext2fs/extent.c index eb096d6..8828764 100644 --- a/lib/ext2fs/extent.c +++ b/lib/ext2fs/extent.c @@ -1027,7 +1027,8 @@ static errcode_t extent_node_split(ext2_extent_handle_t handle) goto done; /* new node hooked in, so update inode block count (do this here?) */ - handle->inode->i_blocks += handle->fs->blocksize / 512; + handle->inode->i_blocks += (handle->fs->blocksize * + EXT2FS_CLUSTER_RATIO(handle->fs)) / 512; retval = ext2fs_write_inode(handle->fs, handle->ino, handle->inode); if (retval) @@ -1501,7 +1502,9 @@ errcode_t ext2fs_extent_delete(ext2_extent_handle_t handle, int flags) return retval; retval = ext2fs_extent_delete(handle, flags); - handle->inode->i_blocks -= handle->fs->blocksize / 512; + handle->inode->i_blocks -= + (handle->fs->blocksize * + EXT2FS_CLUSTER_RATIO(handle->fs)) / 512; retval = ext2fs_write_inode(handle->fs, handle->ino, handle->inode); ext2fs_block_alloc_stats2(handle->fs, -- 1.7.7.3 -- 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
