From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-174.mta0.migadu.com (out-174.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABB023FBBD for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:23:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.174 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711981439; cv=none; b=Vbcug3xfkhXL0WVCjF/N2dtJmO66tXBlufsY1t1MQ+TfNWaqr512kQTpOCZPcQpAYcI4K2jqa49sIpB1J6uelN3t1rXHVPwkvALAyIPz12c0eFwuTBOUUmmN92eT8Wd6+8jlUuJI3qobilRluHr2QfG6GEZCdWjWwAHKHiDXpgM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711981439; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GYqoCIrUSMqT/WrYlqYEW8WIHKXahVEyEOqT1UBvxK8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=OCYHjrnLezSfANr28qwRSHjn8M4oQRJP9NY/ZFUBzO8V68zOQ5/SNgwSAL4tWEQz3z66iSLxVyljMdFL0E1NqofijdlAOQ/LXdfHheVLMpOmSP8sqDqa8Djzr2x28ViXdxksElk4fjEMdhhOEV5WW/NcHBZS9nKFs/74hQEwNtA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=W6LUUvI+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.174 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="W6LUUvI+" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1711981434; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1aQUhHQQfMXDd8XlpsAJbPmuvmkL70g2nOgoG1dTV7Q=; b=W6LUUvI+oi40lw+OPN8G7sKtP8W9p2tAdlMgddaNEeCX4JLFCLYokDk9CJfarlt0gwsfHO AW2NZmYzbeQif1A8KyVOHH2Y8XuiIRqUsFSb/z/dVqUSjyoVbuihcLxCs5sJRjgnOpS09w 45j9MRZsXqhnBgTNEYwiu1rAtMP/M/A= From: Luis Henriques To: "Theodore Ts'o" Cc: Wang Jianjian , Ext4 Developers List Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: Add correct group descriptors and reserved GDT blocks to system zone In-Reply-To: <20230817170557.GA3435781@mit.edu> (Theodore Ts'o's message of "Thu, 17 Aug 2023 13:05:57 -0400") References: <20230817170557.GA3435781@mit.edu> Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 15:23:52 +0100 Message-ID: <87ttkl6u13.fsf@brahms.olymp> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT "Theodore Ts'o" writes: > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 12:28:40AM +0800, Wang Jianjian wrote: >> When setup_system_zone, flex_bg is not initialzied so it is always 1. >> ext4_num_base_meta_blocks() returns the meta blocks in this group >> including reserved GDT blocks, so let's use this helper. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wang Jianjian > > Thanks for the patch. I ended up collapsing the two patches into a > single one, and then fixed up some checkpatch errors. Sorry for revisiting this old thread, but it looks like these patches (commit 68228da51c9a "ext4: add correct group descriptors and reserved GDT blocks to system zone") broke fstest ext4/059. A (very!) quick look seems to show that it's related with the very fact that sbi->s_es->s_reserved_gdt_blocks are now taken into account to compute the number of blocks (which is the point of the patch, of course). Maybe the test needs to be fixed, as it messes up with the GDT reserved blocks...? Cheers, -- Luis