Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext2: Avoid rec_len overflow with 64KB block size

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:30:03 +0200 Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:

> On Thu 04-10-07 16:11:21, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 16:40:44 -0600
> > Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Oct 04, 2007  13:12 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:35:46 -0700
> > > > > ext2: Avoid rec_len overflow with 64KB block size
> > > > > 
> > > > > into 16 bits we have for entry lenght. So we store 0xffff instead and
> > > > > convert value when read from / written to disk.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch clashes in non-trivial ways with
> > > > ext2-convert-to-new-aops-fix.patch and perhaps other things which are
> > > > already queued for 2.6.24 inclusion, so I'll need to ask for an updated
> > > > patch, please.
> > > 
> > > If the rel_len overflow patch isn't going to make it, then we also need
> > > to revert the EXT*_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE change to 65536.  It would be possible
> > > to allow this to be up to 32768 w/o the rec_len overflow fix however.
> > > 
> > 
> > Ok, thanks, I dropped ext3-support-large-blocksize-up-to-pagesize.patch and
> > ext2-support-large-blocksize-up-to-pagesize.patch.
>   Sorry, for the delayed answer but I had some urgent bugs to fix...

You exceeded my memory span.

> Why did you drom ext3-support-large-blocksize-up-to-pagesize.patch?

I forget.  I'll bring it back and see what happens.

> As far
> as I understand your previous email (and also as I've checked against
> 2.6.23-rc8-mm2), the patch fixing rec_len overflow clashes only for ext2...
>   I'll send you an updated patch for ext2 in a moment.

ok..  I'm basically not applying anything any more - the whole thing
is a teetering wreck.   I need to go through the input queue delicately
adding things which look important or relatively non-injurious.