Re: [PATCH] ext4: Do not convert to indirect with bigalloc enabled

[Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:18:05PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> With bigalloc feature enabled we do not support indirect addressing at all
> so we have to prevent extent addressing to indirect addressing
> conversion in this case. The problem has been introduced with the commit
> "ext4: support simple conversion of extent-mapped inodes to use i_blocks"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
> ---
>  fs/ext4/extents.c |    4 ++++
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> index 6c5a70a..ddb6628 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> @@ -4735,6 +4735,10 @@ int ext4_ind_migrate(struct inode *inode)
>  	    (!ext4_test_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_EXTENTS)))
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> +	if (EXT4_HAS_RO_COMPAT_FEATURE(inode->i_sb,
> +				       EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_BIGALLOC))
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
>  	down_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem);
>  	ret = ext4_ext_check_inode(inode);
>  	if (ret)

I am wandering whether ext4_ind_migrate needs to be moved into
fs/ext4/migrate.c file.  Maybe it is better.

Regards,
                                                - Zheng