On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 08:00:35PM +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote: > Wrong check of gdb backup in meta bg as following: > first_group is the first group of meta_bg which contains target group, so > target group is always >= first_group. We check if target group has gdb > backup by comparing first_group with [group + 1] and [group + > EXT4_DESC_PER_BLOCK(sb) - 1]. As group >= first_group, then [group + N] is > > first_group. So no copy of gdb backup in meta bg is done in > setup_new_flex_group_blocks. > > No need to do gdb backup copy in meta bg from setup_new_flex_group_blocks > as we always copy updated gdb block to backups at end of > ext4_flex_group_add as following: > > ext4_flex_group_add > /* no gdb backup copy for meta bg any more */ > setup_new_flex_group_blocks > > /* update current group number */ > ext4_update_super > sbi->s_groups_count += flex_gd->count; > > /* > * if group in meta bg contains backup is added, the primary gdb block > * of the meta bg will be copy to backup in new added group here. > */ > for (; gdb_num <= gdb_num_end; gdb_num++) > update_backups(...) > > In summary, we can remove wrong gdb backup copy code in > setup_new_flex_group_blocks. > > Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx>
