Hi!
I'm (re)sending two fixes to e2fsck that are related with quota handling.
The fixes are the first two patches, the other two are test cases for these
fixes.
As I mentioned in v1, the issues were found using fstests ext4/014 and
ext4/019. And the only thing in this series that changed from v1 was the
first test ("tests: new test to check quota after directory optimization"),
which is now using a much simplified version of the testcase.
Note that, since the first two patches didn't change, they have already a
Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxx>
which I'm not including in the patches themselves. Should I? Or is that
better left for the maintainer (eventually) applying them?
Cheers,
--
Luis
Luis Henriques (SUSE) (4):
e2fsck: update quota accounting after directory optimization
e2fsck: update quota when deallocating a bad inode
tests: new test to check quota after directory optimization
tests: new test to check quota after a bad inode deallocation
e2fsck/pass2.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++-------
e2fsck/rehash.c | 27 ++++++++++++++-----
tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/expect.1 | 18 +++++++++++++
tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/expect.2 | 7 +++++
tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/image.gz | Bin 0 -> 11594 bytes
tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/name | 1 +
tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/expect.1 | 18 +++++++++++++
tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/expect.2 | 7 +++++
tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/image.gz | Bin 0 -> 10761 bytes
tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/name | 1 +
10 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/expect.1
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/expect.2
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/image.gz
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_deallocate_inode/name
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/expect.1
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/expect.2
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/image.gz
create mode 100644 tests/f_quota_shrinkdir/name
