On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 03:14:26PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 02:59:33PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 03:53:21PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > If there are too many bad block mappings in a file and the user says > > > to zap it, erase i_block before clearing the inode. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Why is this necessary? E2fsck will clear i_links_count and set dtime, > > so the contents of i_block shouldn't matter, yes? > > Hmm... oh, I think I remember where this patch came from. When I wrote the > patch "e2fsck: fix inode coherency issue when iterating an inode's blocks", I > looked down a few lines to see what pb.clear == 1 did. I figured that if the > block mappings were really bad (i.e. there are more than 12 bad mappings), why > not just wipe i_block entirely? > > I didn't have a specific failure case in mind when I wrote this patch. Ok, then I'll drop this. In general I try to avoid unnecessary zero'ing when possible. It might be useful in doing a post morten after the user runs e2fsck -y, and so long as inode is skipped, I'd rather not zap more of the inode structure than is strictly necessary. Cheers, - Ted -- 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
