On 3/19/15 11:47 AM, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 03:33:14PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> process_dir2_data() has special . and .. processing; it is able
>> to correct these inodes, so there is no reason to clear them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> repair/dir2.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/repair/dir2.c b/repair/dir2.c
>> index 9e6c67d..3acf71c 100644
>> --- a/repair/dir2.c
>> +++ b/repair/dir2.c
>> @@ -1331,6 +1331,18 @@ _("entry at block %u offset %" PRIdPTR " in directory inode %" PRIu64
>> dep->namelen = 1;
>> clearino = 1;
>> }
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * We have a special dot & dotdot fixer-upper below which can
>> + * sort out the proper inode number, so don't clear it.
>> + */
>> + if ((dep->namelen == 1 && dep->name[0] == '.') ||
>> + (dep->namelen == 2 &&
>> + dep->name[0] == '.' && dep->name[1] == '.')) {
>> + clearino = 0;
>> + clearreason = NULL;
>> + }
>> +
>
> Whitespace damage on the blank line above.
>
> Seems Ok, but the question I have is what happens if the dot or dotdot
> namelen was bogus?
If namelen is 1 and name[0] is '.', or
if namelen is 2 and name[0] is '.' and name[1] is '..'
then how can that the len be bogus? The test is for the name being
either precisely '.' or '..' and nothing else, right?
-Eric
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
