On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 12:38:55AM +0000, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 05:17:41PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 12:03:28AM +0000, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > Groovy, thanks, let's not forget the xfs_repair respective fix :) let me know
> > > if you have any feedback on that.
> >
> > TBH I've lost any proposed xfs_repair patches to the mists of time
> > because some patch volcano keeps erupting on the lists. :P
> >
> > Uh... I think it's fine for xfs_{repair,scrub} to clear the immutable
> > and append flags on any special inodes it finds, particularly since
> > neither flag has any real meaning for block/char/fifo/socket/symlinks
> > anyway.
>
> Sure, my point during review of that series for xfs_repair in particular
> though was that for symlinks the justification is different (half of the
> commit log in this new patch), as such I'd prefer to deal with them in a
> separate follow up patch.
Ah, found it again finally[1]. ISTR the discussion petered out after
Dave asked if you had a map of inode mode
(file/dir/bdev/cdev/fifo/socket/symlink) to allowable flags. That would
be a good general way to detect and clear stray flags.
--D
[1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=150948985429374&w=4
> Luis
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
