From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [PATCH,STABLE 2.6.29 14/18] ext4: Ignore i_file_acl_high unless EXT4_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT is present Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:17:28 -0600 Message-ID: <20090603181728.GP9002@webber.adilger.int> References: <1243944479-20574-5-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-6-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-7-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-8-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-9-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-10-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-11-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-12-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-13-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1243944479-20574-14-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: "Theodore Ts'o" Return-path: Received: from sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM ([192.18.43.132]:38897 "EHLO sca-es-mail-1.sun.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751693AbZFCSRh (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:17:37 -0400 Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n53IHedt020320 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Content-disposition: inline Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKO00J00DGAIC00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:17:40 -0700 (PDT) In-reply-to: <1243944479-20574-14-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Jun 02, 2009 08:07 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Don't try to look at i_file_acl_high unless the INCOMPAT_64BIT feature > bit is set. The field is normally zero, but older versions of e2fsck > didn't automatically check to make sure of this, so in the spirit of > "be liberal in what you accept", don't look at i_file_acl_high unless > we are using a 64-bit filesystem. Should we do the same with other "_hi" fields in the inode? There are many cases like this for EXT4_DESC_SIZE(sb) >= EXT4_MIN_DESC_SIZE_64BIT in super.c. Does e2fsck check and zero those already? Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.