On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 03:06:23PM -0400, TR Reardon wrote: > If the change from journal_inode to journal_dev is/was made prior to the > recent change, the s_jnl_blocks will have whatever it last had. So if it > started with journal_inode and then switched to journal_dev (again, prior to > your fix) or no journal, the s_jnl_blocks will have the old journal_inode > info, and adding/removing journal_dev does no clear it out. For a new fs > with created only with journal_dev, there is no issue. I'm just arguing that > *adding* journal_dev should also zero this out. You would also want to zero out s_jnl_blocks if creating a journal on a mounted FS, since there's no way to find the block map/ETB blocks; the best we can do is hope the user runs e2fsck, which will fix it. --D > > +Reardon > > > ---------------------------------------- > > Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 09:43:42 -0700 > > From: darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx > > To: thomas_reardon@xxxxxxxxxxx > > CC: linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/25] misc: zero s_jnl_blocks when removing internal journal > > > > [cc linux-ext4] > > > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:09:55AM -0400, TR Reardon wrote: > >> Note that this only works (zeroes out) when removing inode journal. Removing > >> an existing journal_dev leaves s_jnl_blocks untouched. To be absolutely > >> clean, perhaps it should be wiped in all removal cases? > > > > s_jnl_blocks shouldn't be set if an external journal is in use. > > > > (Unless it is somehow?) > > > > --D > > -- > 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
