Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: ignore differing NEEDS_RECOVERY flag on backup sbs

[Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>]

Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2008  09:02 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> This is for RH bugzilla 471925 -  Complete scan of filesystems expanded online
>>
>> When we resize online, the primary superblock gets copied to all
>> the backups, and of course since we're mounted the NEEDS_RECOVERY
>> flag is set.  A subsequent fsck will find the backups have the
>> NEEDS_RECOVERY flag set while the primary does not, and this
>> forces a full fsck pass.
>>
>> I think this flag can be safely ignored in the flag comparisons.
> 
> Should we also mask out this flag from the backup superblock copies
> when they are made, or is there an equal chance that the superblock
> has NEEDS_RECOVERY and the backups do not?

I think it might be a good idea (to mask at growfs time) for
completeness.  Is there *ever* any valid reason for a backup superblock
to have this flag set?  Near as I can tell, online growfs is the only
thing that ever sets it, and this "flag match" check is the only thing
that ever tests it.

-Eric