From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext2: Avoid rec_len overflow with 64KB block size
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 16:40:44 -0600
Message-ID: <20071004224044.GH5628@schatzie.adilger.int>
References: <20070828190551.415127746@sgi.com> <20070828190735.292638294@sgi.com> <1188432669.3799.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1188434857.3799.76.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1191285346.11737.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20071004131207.65406a7b.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sho@tnes.nec.co.jp, jack@suse.cz,
	clameter@sgi.com
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20071004131207.65406a7b.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Oct 04, 2007  13:12 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:35:46 -0700
> > ext2: Avoid rec_len overflow with 64KB block size
> > 
> > into 16 bits we have for entry lenght. So we store 0xffff instead and
> > convert value when read from / written to disk.
> 
> This patch clashes in non-trivial ways with
> ext2-convert-to-new-aops-fix.patch and perhaps other things which are
> already queued for 2.6.24 inclusion, so I'll need to ask for an updated
> patch, please.

If the rel_len overflow patch isn't going to make it, then we also need
to revert the EXT*_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE change to 65536.  It would be possible
to allow this to be up to 32768 w/o the rec_len overflow fix however.

Yes, this does imply that those patches were in the wrong order in the
patch series, and I apologize for that, even if it isn't my fault.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Software Engineer
Cluster File Systems, Inc.