From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:45:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m254jBCp020692 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 20:45:13 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 23:45:39 -0500 From: "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" Subject: Re: [REVIEW #4] bad_features2 support in userspace Message-ID: <20080305044539.GC19104@josefsipek.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Barry Naujok Cc: "xfs@oss.sgi.com" On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 03:37:07PM +1100, Barry Naujok wrote: > Due to the issue of mounting filesystem with older kernels and > potentially reading sb_features2 from the wrong location. It > seems the best course of action is to always make sb_features2 > and sb_bad_features2 the same. This is pretty important as > new bits in this are supposed to stop older kernels from > mounting filesystems with unsupported features. > > If sb_bad_features2 is zero, and the old kernel tries to read > sb_features2 from this location during mount, it will succeed > as it will read zero. > > So, this patch changes mkfs.xfs to set sb_bad_features2 to > the same as sb_features2, xfs_check and xfs_repair now also > makes sure they are the same. Idea: good Implementation: I didn't see anything wrong. Josef 'Jeff' Sipek. P.S. Any reason why you inline the patch _and_ attach? -- I think there is a world market for maybe five computers. - Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.