From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:58:09 -0700 (PDT) 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 m9GDw7TW009251 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:58:07 -0700 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id CDB2350584A for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:59:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.189]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 2OLJFziODfU3UZHR for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:59:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id h3so2588nfh.42 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 06:59:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:59:26 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?Am=C3=A9rico?= Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH] XFS fix remount rw with unrecognized options Message-ID: <20081016135926.GC13374@hack.voiplan.pt> References: <20081016002926.D912558FA22B@chook.melbourne.sgi.com> <20081016134112.GA8773@ubuntu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081016134112.GA8773@ubuntu> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Jianjun Kong Cc: Tim Shimmin , stable@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 09:41:12PM +0800, Jianjun Kong wrote: >On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:29:26AM +1100, Tim Shimmin wrote: >>Resending as I mangled sending the mail from home last time. Sorry. >> >>Please include the following patch for 2.6.27.1 stable release as >>suggested by Christoph Hellwig and Eric Sandeen. >>It fixes a regression in the recent remount recoding >>where remounting say from ro to rw allows the xfs flags to >>be out of sync with the vfs flags, resulting >>in failures for some programs such as touch (which end up calling xfs_setattr). >>The fix is a very minor and clear. >> >>Thanks, >>Tim. >> >>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 14:30:44 +0200 >>From: Christoph Hellwig >>To: xfs@oss.sgi.com >>Subject: [PATCH] fix remount rw with unrecognized options >> >>When we skip unrecognized options in xfs_fs_remount we should just break >>out of the switch and not return because otherwise we may skip clearing >>the xfs-internal read-only flag. This will only show up on some >>operations like touch because most read-only checks are done by the VFS >>which thinks this filesystem is r/w. Eventually we should replace the >>XFS read-only flag with a helper that always checks the VFS flag to make >>sure they can never get out of sync. >> >>Bug reported and fix verified by Marcel Beister on #xfs. >>Bug fix verified by updated xfstests/189. >> >>Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig >>Acked-by: Eric Sandeen >>Signed-off-by: Timothy Shimmin >> >>Index: mainline/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c >>=================================================================== >>--- mainline.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c 2008-10-15 17:59:26.542652847 +1100 >>+++ mainline/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c 2008-10-15 17:59:45.376217172 +1100 >>@@ -1323,7 +1323,7 @@ xfs_fs_remount( >> "XFS: mount option \"%s\" not supported for remount\n", p); >> return -EINVAL; >> #else >>- return 0; >>+ break; >> #endif >> } >> } > > >And the code above "return 0" can not be executed, so delete them. return 0; is in the removed part... so it's already removed. >__________________________________________ >#if 0 > printk(KERN_INFO > "XFS: mount option \"%s\" not supported for remount\n", p); > return -EINVAL; >#else > return 0; >----------------------------------------- > > >Signed-off-by: Jianjun Kong >--- > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c | 7 +------ > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c >index e390136..bd5ec81 100644 >--- a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c >+++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c >@@ -1318,12 +1318,7 @@ xfs_fs_remount( > * every remount request, and silently ignore all > * options that we can't actually change. > */ >-#if 0 >- printk(KERN_INFO >- "XFS: mount option \"%s\" not supported for remount\n", p); >- return -EINVAL; >-#else >- break; >+ break 0; break 0; doesn't make any sense in C... -- "Sometimes the only way to stay sane is to go a little crazy."