From: Evgeniy Dushistov <dushistov@mail.ru>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
satyam@infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 106/327] ufs: Fix mount check in ufs_fill_super()
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 12:30:11 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071027083011.GA21273@rain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200710170626.l9H6QrYD006747@imap1.linux-foundation.org>
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 11:26:53PM -0700, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> From: Satyam Sharma <satyam@infradead.org>
>
> The current code skips the check to verify whether the filesystem was
> previously cleanly unmounted, if (flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_44BSD or
> UFS_ST_OLD. This looks like an inadvertent bug that slipped in due to
> parantheses in the compound conditional to me, especially given that
> ufs_get_fs_state() handles the UFS_ST_44BSD case perfectly well. So, let's
> fix the compound condition appropriately.
>
I wonder on what type of UFS do you test this patch?
NetBSD and FreeBSD do not use "fs_state", they use "fs_clean" flag,
only Solaris does check like this: fs_state + fs_time == FSOK.
That's why parentheses was like that.
At now with linux-2.6.24-rc1-git1, I get: fs need fsck,
but NetBSD's fsck says that's all ok.
I suggest revert this patch.
> Signed-off-by: Satyam Sharma <satyam@infradead.org>
> Cc: Evgeniy Dushistov <dushistov@mail.ru>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> fs/ufs/super.c | 15 ++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN fs/ufs/super.c~ufs-fix-sun-state-fix-mount-check-in-ufs_fill_super fs/ufs/super.c
> --- a/fs/ufs/super.c~ufs-fix-sun-state-fix-mount-check-in-ufs_fill_super
> +++ a/fs/ufs/super.c
> @@ -933,19 +933,20 @@ magic_found:
> goto again;
> }
>
> - sbi->s_flags = flags;/*after that line some functions use s_flags*/
> + /* Set sbi->s_flags here, used by ufs_get_fs_state() below */
> + sbi->s_flags = flags;
> ufs_print_super_stuff(sb, usb1, usb2, usb3);
>
> /*
> * Check, if file system was correctly unmounted.
> * If not, make it read only.
> */
> - if (((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_44BSD) ||
> - ((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_OLD) ||
> - (((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_SUN ||
> - (flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_SUNOS ||
> - (flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_SUNx86) &&
> - (ufs_get_fs_state(sb, usb1, usb3) == (UFS_FSOK - fs32_to_cpu(sb, usb1->fs_time))))) {
> + if ((((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_44BSD) ||
> + ((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_OLD) ||
> + ((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_SUN) ||
> + ((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_SUNOS) ||
> + ((flags & UFS_ST_MASK) == UFS_ST_SUNx86)) &&
> + (ufs_get_fs_state(sb, usb1, usb3) == (UFS_FSOK - fs32_to_cpu(sb, usb1->fs_time)))) {
> switch(usb1->fs_clean) {
> case UFS_FSCLEAN:
> UFSD("fs is clean\n");
> _
--
/Evgeniy
parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-27 8:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <200710170626.l9H6QrYD006747@imap1.linux-foundation.org>]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071027083011.GA21273@rain \
--to=dushistov@mail.ru \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=satyam@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.