Re: ext3: bogus i_mode errors with

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 12:01, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2006  18:02 +0200, Andre Noll wrote:
> > On 03:36, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > The other issue is that you need to potentially set "num" bits in the
> > > bitmap here, if those all overlap metadata.  In fact, it might just
> > > make more sense at this stage to walk all of the bits in the bitmaps,
> > > the inode table and the backup superblock and group descriptor to see
> > > if they need fixing also.
> > 
> > I tried to implement this, but I could not find out how to check at this
> > point whether a given bit (in the block bitmap, say) needs fixing.
> Well, since we know at least one bit needs fixing and results in the block
> being written to disk then setting the bits for all of the other metadata
> blocks in this group has no extra IO cost (only a tiny amount of CPU).
> Re-setting the bits if they are already set is not harmful.

I.e, something like

        int i;
        ext3_fsblk_t bit;
        unsigned long gdblocks = EXT3_SB(sb)->s_gdb_count;

        for (i = 0, bit = 1; i < gdblocks; i++, bit++)
                ext3_set_bit(bit, gdp_bh->b_data);

Is that correct?

The only person who always got his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux