From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: [PATCH] libext2fs: use ext2fs_blocks_count() in ext2fs_open2() Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:43:10 -0500 Message-ID: <4A9EA09E.10509@redhat.com> References: <4A9D9574.3010606@redhat.com> <20090902055953.GF4197@webber.adilger.int> <150c16850909012305y2481c54fra671b123780caa80@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andreas Dilger , ext4 development , "Theodore Ts'o" To: Justin Maggard Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16806 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752792AbZIBQnN (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:43:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <150c16850909012305y2481c54fra671b123780caa80@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Justin Maggard wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:59 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: >> On Sep 01, 2009 16:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> ext2fs_open2() was only looking at s_blocks_count, and >>> when it wrapped to a low number, it was failing the test of: >>> >>> fs->super->s_first_data_block >= fs->super->s_blocks_count >>> >>> which made the superblock look corrupt. >> Is this the source of the "e2fsck is finding bad checksums" problem? > > I applied this earlier today, and it didn't appear to help in my test case. > > -Justin Nah, didn't expect it to, but I'm working towards that. Just have to whack down the bugs between where I am, and your bug ;) -Eric