On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 12:03:15AM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> > diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/super.c b/fs/reiserfs/super.c
> > index ef5e541..acafe32 100644
> > --- a/fs/reiserfs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/reiserfs/super.c
> > @@ -1124,7 +1124,9 @@ static void handle_attrs(struct super_bl
> > "reiserfs: cannot support attributes until flag is set in
> > super-block"); REISERFS_SB(s)->s_mount_opt &= ~(1 << REISERFS_ATTRS);
> > }
> > - } else if (le32_to_cpu(rs->s_flags) & reiserfs_attrs_cleared) {
> > + } else if ((le32_to_cpu(rs->s_flags) & reiserfs_attrs_cleared) &&
> > + (get_inode_sd_version(s->s_root->d_inode) == STAT_DATA_V2)) {
> > + /* Enable attrs by default on v3.6-native file systems */
> > REISERFS_SB(s)->s_mount_opt |= (1 << REISERFS_ATTRS);
> > }
> > }
>
> I'm afraid that still doesn't solve the problem for me, I added two printk to
> be sure whats going on - get_inode_sd_version(s->s_root->d_inode) returns
> STAT_DATA_V2 for all of my partitions.
Too bad. Looks like autoenabling of the "attrs" options won't fly,
and the only safe solution is to revert those patches and require
explicit "attrs" option.
Attachment:
pgp7IN0UdAQCN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- References:
- 2.6.15 Bug? New security model?
- From: Bernd Schubert <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.15 Bug? New security model?
- From: Jeff Mahoney <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.15 Bug? New security model?
- From: Sergey Vlasov <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.15 Bug? New security model?
- From: Bernd Schubert <[email protected]>
- 2.6.15 Bug? New security model?
- Prev by Date: Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest)
- Next by Date: Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest)
- Previous by thread: Re: 2.6.15 Bug? New security model?
- Next by thread: Re: 2.6.15 Bug? New security model?
- Index(es):
 |