Makes sense to me.
Reviewed-by: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks Eric :-)
Cheers,
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 03:02:10PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> process_dir2_data() may fix the root dir's parent inode:
>
> "bad .. entry in root directory inode 6912, was 7159: correcting"
>
> But we don't update the *parent passed in in that case; this then leads to
> an assert later in process_dir2, because *parent is still the wrong value:
>
> xfs_repair: dir2.c:2039: process_dir2:
> Assertion `(ino != mp->m_sb.sb_rootino && ino != *parent) ||
> (ino == mp->m_sb.sb_rootino && (ino == *parent || need_root_dotdot == 1))'
> failed.
>
> Updating the value of *parent when we fix the parent value resolves this
> problem. Do it whether or not we're in no_modify mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/repair/dir2.c b/repair/dir2.c
> index 6b8964d..67cd9d1 100644
> --- a/repair/dir2.c
> +++ b/repair/dir2.c
> @@ -1468,6 +1468,7 @@ _("bad .. entry in root directory inode %" PRIu64 ", was %" PRIu64 ": "),
> } else {
> do_warn(_("would correct\n"));
> }
> + *parent = ino;
> }
> }
> /*
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
--
Carlos
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
