From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD787F37 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 12:29:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38BE18F804C for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:29:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 3Xk5ECS9YGpAuC0x for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:29:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <550B0777.10108@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 12:29:27 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] xfs_repair: don't clear . or .. in process_dir2_data References: <1426624395-8258-1-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com> <1426624395-8258-13-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com> <20150319164716.GE11669@laptop.bfoster> In-Reply-To: <20150319164716.GE11669@laptop.bfoster> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Brian Foster , Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 3/19/15 11:47 AM, Brian Foster wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 03:33:14PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> process_dir2_data() has special . and .. processing; it is able >> to correct these inodes, so there is no reason to clear them. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen >> --- >> repair/dir2.c | 12 ++++++++++++ >> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/repair/dir2.c b/repair/dir2.c >> index 9e6c67d..3acf71c 100644 >> --- a/repair/dir2.c >> +++ b/repair/dir2.c >> @@ -1331,6 +1331,18 @@ _("entry at block %u offset %" PRIdPTR " in directory inode %" PRIu64 >> dep->namelen = 1; >> clearino = 1; >> } >> + >> + /* >> + * We have a special dot & dotdot fixer-upper below which can >> + * sort out the proper inode number, so don't clear it. >> + */ >> + if ((dep->namelen == 1 && dep->name[0] == '.') || >> + (dep->namelen == 2 && >> + dep->name[0] == '.' && dep->name[1] == '.')) { >> + clearino = 0; >> + clearreason = NULL; >> + } >> + > > Whitespace damage on the blank line above. > > Seems Ok, but the question I have is what happens if the dot or dotdot > namelen was bogus? If namelen is 1 and name[0] is '.', or if namelen is 2 and name[0] is '.' and name[1] is '..' then how can that the len be bogus? The test is for the name being either precisely '.' or '..' and nothing else, right? -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs