public inbox for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 2
@ 2008-03-03 20:40 Eric Sandeen
  2008-03-03 22:05 ` Andreas Dilger
  2008-03-04  3:19 ` [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 3 Eric Sandeen
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-03-03 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ext4 development

large inodes with both fast symlinks and in-inode selinux attrs
were not surviving moves via resize2fs.

Somehow I missed that there was an ext2fs_get_next_inode_full... 
I think the below fix is correct, on top of my previous patch
(and what is in e2fsprogs-1.40.7...)

But I don't mind a review ;)

Thanks,
-Eric

------------------- changelog ----------------------

Use ext2fs_get_next_inode_full() in resize2fs; previous attempt
was not properly handling all cases, and was incorrectly setting
i_extra_isize.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
---

Index: e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
===================================================================
--- e2fsprogs-1.40.7.orig/resize/resize2fs.c
+++ e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
@@ -1168,11 +1168,12 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
 	 * elsewhere in the inode table
 	 */
 	while (1) {
-		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode(scan, &ino, &inode);
+		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode_full(scan, &ino, buf, inode_size);
 		if (retval) goto errout;
 		if (!ino)
 			break;
 
+		memcpy(&inode, buf, sizeof(struct ext2_inode));
 		if (inode.i_links_count == 0 && ino != EXT2_RESIZE_INO)
 			continue; /* inode not in use */
 
@@ -1221,10 +1222,7 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
 			}
 		}
 		ext2fs_mark_inode_bitmap(rfs->new_fs->inode_map, new_inode);
-		memcpy(buf, &inode, sizeof(struct ext2_inode));
 		large_inode = (struct ext2_inode_large *)buf;
-		large_inode->i_extra_isize = sizeof(struct ext2_inode_large) -
-			EXT2_GOOD_OLD_INODE_SIZE;
 		if (pb.changed) {
 			/* Get the new version of the inode */
 			retval = ext2fs_read_inode_full(rfs->old_fs, ino,


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 2
  2008-03-03 20:40 [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 2 Eric Sandeen
@ 2008-03-03 22:05 ` Andreas Dilger
  2008-03-03 22:18   ` Eric Sandeen
  2008-03-04  3:19 ` [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 3 Eric Sandeen
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Dilger @ 2008-03-03 22:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: ext4 development

On Mar 03, 2008  14:40 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> large inodes with both fast symlinks and in-inode selinux attrs
> were not surviving moves via resize2fs.
> 
> Somehow I missed that there was an ext2fs_get_next_inode_full... 
> I think the below fix is correct, on top of my previous patch
> (and what is in e2fsprogs-1.40.7...)
> 
> ------------------- changelog ----------------------
> 
> Use ext2fs_get_next_inode_full() in resize2fs; previous attempt
> was not properly handling all cases, and was incorrectly setting
> i_extra_isize.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> Index: e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
> ===================================================================
> --- e2fsprogs-1.40.7.orig/resize/resize2fs.c
> +++ e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
> @@ -1168,11 +1168,12 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
>  	 * elsewhere in the inode table
>  	 */
>  	while (1) {
> -		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode(scan, &ino, &inode);
> +		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode_full(scan, &ino, buf, inode_size);
>  		if (retval) goto errout;
>  		if (!ino)
>  			break;
>  
> +		memcpy(&inode, buf, sizeof(struct ext2_inode));

Should this be using "sizeof(struct ext2_inode)" or should it be using
"sb->s_inode_size" instead (extracted from the right struct of course)?

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 2
  2008-03-03 22:05 ` Andreas Dilger
@ 2008-03-03 22:18   ` Eric Sandeen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-03-03 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andreas Dilger; +Cc: ext4 development

Andreas Dilger wrote:

>> ===================================================================
>> --- e2fsprogs-1.40.7.orig/resize/resize2fs.c
>> +++ e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
>> @@ -1168,11 +1168,12 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
>>  	 * elsewhere in the inode table
>>  	 */
>>  	while (1) {
>> -		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode(scan, &ino, &inode);
>> +		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode_full(scan, &ino, buf, inode_size);
>>  		if (retval) goto errout;
>>  		if (!ino)
>>  			break;
>>  
>> +		memcpy(&inode, buf, sizeof(struct ext2_inode));
> 
> Should this be using "sizeof(struct ext2_inode)" or should it be using
> "sb->s_inode_size" instead (extracted from the right struct of course)?

well, let's see... I think we read "inode_size" in get_next_inode_full,
which is s_inode_size, into buf, which was allocated to size
inode_size/s_inode_size.

But "inode" is just a plain ol' little inode.  I think really this
"inode" is just for convenience for accessing the normal inode fields....

But I now that I try livecd-creator with this patch, even on 128-byte
inodes, the fscks it runs is finding trouble post-resize (this despite
all the regression test passing...)  *sigh* I think I'd better sit on
this problem for a while longer before I send the next patch :)

Ted, pls ignore this for now...

-Eric

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 3
  2008-03-03 20:40 [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 2 Eric Sandeen
  2008-03-03 22:05 ` Andreas Dilger
@ 2008-03-04  3:19 ` Eric Sandeen
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2008-03-04  3:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ext4 development

(further livecd-creation testing found more problems; this patch
seems cleaner, survives livecd creations w/o any corruption, and
passes regression tests.  Comments welcome of course.  Should apply
on top of e2fsprogs-1.40.7, still).

-----------------

Use ext2fs_get_next_inode_full() in resize2fs and clean up large
inode handling; previous attempt was not properly handling all cases, 
and was incorrectly setting i_extra_isize.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
---

Index: e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
===================================================================
--- e2fsprogs-1.40.7.orig/resize/resize2fs.c
+++ e2fsprogs-1.40.7/resize/resize2fs.c
@@ -1109,8 +1109,7 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
 {
 	struct process_block_struct	pb;
 	ext2_ino_t		ino, new_inode;
-	struct ext2_inode 	inode, *buf = NULL;
-	struct ext2_inode_large	*large_inode;
+	struct ext2_inode 	*inode = NULL;
 	ext2_inode_scan 	scan = NULL;
 	errcode_t		retval;
 	int			group;
@@ -1154,12 +1153,12 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
 	}
 	ext2fs_set_inode_callback(scan, progress_callback, (void *) rfs);
 	pb.rfs = rfs;
-	pb.inode = &inode;
+	pb.inode = inode;
 	pb.error = 0;
 	new_inode = EXT2_FIRST_INODE(rfs->new_fs->super);
 	inode_size = EXT2_INODE_SIZE(rfs->new_fs->super);
-	buf = malloc(inode_size);
-	if (!buf) {
+	inode = malloc(inode_size);
+	if (!inode) {
 		retval = ENOMEM;
 		goto errout;
 	}
@@ -1168,29 +1167,29 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
 	 * elsewhere in the inode table
 	 */
 	while (1) {
-		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode(scan, &ino, &inode);
+		retval = ext2fs_get_next_inode_full(scan, &ino, inode, inode_size);
 		if (retval) goto errout;
 		if (!ino)
 			break;
 
-		if (inode.i_links_count == 0 && ino != EXT2_RESIZE_INO)
+		if (inode->i_links_count == 0 && ino != EXT2_RESIZE_INO)
 			continue; /* inode not in use */
 
-		pb.is_dir = LINUX_S_ISDIR(inode.i_mode);
+		pb.is_dir = LINUX_S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode);
 		pb.changed = 0;
 
-		if (inode.i_file_acl && rfs->bmap) {
+		if (inode->i_file_acl && rfs->bmap) {
 			new_block = ext2fs_extent_translate(rfs->bmap, 
-							    inode.i_file_acl);
+							    inode->i_file_acl);
 			if (new_block) {
-				inode.i_file_acl = new_block;
-				retval = ext2fs_write_inode(rfs->old_fs, 
-							    ino, &inode);
+				inode->i_file_acl = new_block;
+				retval = ext2fs_write_inode_full(rfs->old_fs, 
+							    ino, inode, inode_size);
 				if (retval) goto errout;
 			}
 		}
 		
-		if (ext2fs_inode_has_valid_blocks(&inode) &&
+		if (ext2fs_inode_has_valid_blocks(inode) &&
 		    (rfs->bmap || pb.is_dir)) {
 			pb.ino = ino;
 			retval = ext2fs_block_iterate2(rfs->old_fs,
@@ -1221,23 +1220,19 @@ static errcode_t inode_scan_and_fix(ext2
 			}
 		}
 		ext2fs_mark_inode_bitmap(rfs->new_fs->inode_map, new_inode);
-		memcpy(buf, &inode, sizeof(struct ext2_inode));
-		large_inode = (struct ext2_inode_large *)buf;
-		large_inode->i_extra_isize = sizeof(struct ext2_inode_large) -
-			EXT2_GOOD_OLD_INODE_SIZE;
 		if (pb.changed) {
 			/* Get the new version of the inode */
 			retval = ext2fs_read_inode_full(rfs->old_fs, ino,
-						buf, inode_size);
+						inode, inode_size);
 			if (retval) goto errout;
 		}
-		inode.i_ctime = time(0);
+		inode->i_ctime = time(0);
 		retval = ext2fs_write_inode_full(rfs->old_fs, new_inode,
-						buf, inode_size);
+						inode, inode_size);
 		if (retval) goto errout;
 
 		group = (new_inode-1) / EXT2_INODES_PER_GROUP(rfs->new_fs->super);
-		if (LINUX_S_ISDIR(inode.i_mode))
+		if (LINUX_S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
 			rfs->new_fs->group_desc[group].bg_used_dirs_count++;
 		
 #ifdef RESIZE2FS_DEBUG
@@ -1263,8 +1258,8 @@ errout:
 		ext2fs_close_inode_scan(scan);
 	if (block_buf)
 		ext2fs_free_mem(&block_buf);
-	if (buf)
-		free(buf);
+	if (inode)
+		free(inode);
 	return retval;
 }
 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2008-03-04  3:19 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-03-03 20:40 [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 2 Eric Sandeen
2008-03-03 22:05 ` Andreas Dilger
2008-03-03 22:18   ` Eric Sandeen
2008-03-04  3:19 ` [PATCH] resize2fs vs. large inodes, take 3 Eric Sandeen

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox