Set the journals JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT on devices with more
than 32bit block sizes during mount time. This ensure proper record
lenth when writing to the journal.
Signed-off-by: Jose R. Santos <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext4/super.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.22-rc4.orig/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:15:54.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:16:10.000000000 -0700
@@ -1804,6 +1804,13 @@
goto failed_mount3;
}
+ if (ext4_blocks_count(es) > 0xffffffffULL &&
+ !jbd2_journal_set_features(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_journal, 0, 0,
+ JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT)) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR "ext4: Failed to set 64-bit journal feature\n");
+ goto failed_mount4;
+ }
+
/* We have now updated the journal if required, so we can
* validate the data journaling mode. */
switch (test_opt(sb, DATA_FLAGS)) {
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:32 -0400
Mingming Cao <[email protected]> wrote:
> Set the journals JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT on devices with more
> than 32bit block sizes during mount time. This ensure proper record
> lenth when writing to the journal.
This patch isn't in Ted's kernel.org directory and hasn't been in -mm.
Where did it come from? Is something amiss with ext4 patch management?
> Signed-off-by: Jose R. Santos <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/ext4/super.c | 11 +++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.22-rc4.orig/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:15:54.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:16:10.000000000 -0700
> @@ -1804,6 +1804,13 @@
Please prepare patches using `diff -p'
> goto failed_mount3;
> }
>
> + if (ext4_blocks_count(es) > 0xffffffffULL &&
> + !jbd2_journal_set_features(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_journal, 0, 0,
> + JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT)) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "ext4: Failed to set 64-bit journal feature\n");
> + goto failed_mount4;
> + }
It is not appropriate for the text "ext4" to appear in a JBD2 message.
> /* We have now updated the journal if required, so we can
> * validate the data journaling mode. */
> switch (test_opt(sb, DATA_FLAGS)) {
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:32 -0400
> Mingming Cao <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Set the journals JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT on devices with more
> > than 32bit block sizes during mount time. This ensure proper record
> > lenth when writing to the journal.
>
> This patch isn't in Ted's kernel.org directory and hasn't been in -mm.
> Where did it come from? Is something amiss with ext4 patch management?
>
Jose Santo posted it to linux-ext4 mailing list.
I agree this bug fix should included in Ted's git tree or mm tree. There
are other ext4 cleanups in this series that should goes to mm tree also.
> > Signed-off-by: Jose R. Santos <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > fs/ext4/super.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.22-rc4.orig/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:15:54.000000000 -0700
> > +++ linux-2.6.22-rc4/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-06-11 16:16:10.000000000 -0700
> > @@ -1804,6 +1804,13 @@
>
> Please prepare patches using `diff -p'
>
Will do.
> > goto failed_mount3;
> > }
> >
> > + if (ext4_blocks_count(es) > 0xffffffffULL &&
> > + !jbd2_journal_set_features(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_journal, 0, 0,
> > + JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT)) {
> > + printk(KERN_ERR "ext4: Failed to set 64-bit journal feature\n");
> > + goto failed_mount4;
> > + }
>
> It is not appropriate for the text "ext4" to appear in a JBD2 message.
This is part of ext4 code. Ext4 will set the 64-bit JBD2 flag if the fs
is larger than 32 bit blocks.
> > /* We have now updated the journal if required, so we can
> > * validate the data journaling mode. */
> > switch (test_opt(sb, DATA_FLAGS)) {
>
>
Set the journals JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT on devices with more
than 32bit block sizes during mount time. This ensure proper record
lenth when writing to the journal.
Signed-off-by: Jose R. Santos <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext4/super.c | 7 7 + 0 - 0 !
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6/fs/ext4/super.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-07-11 09:36:00.000000000 -0500
+++ linux-2.6/fs/ext4/super.c 2007-07-11 09:36:20.000000000 -0500
@@ -1804,6 +1804,13 @@ static int ext4_fill_super (struct super
goto failed_mount3;
}
+ if (ext4_blocks_count(es) > 0xffffffffULL &&
+ !jbd2_journal_set_features(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_journal, 0, 0,
+ JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT)) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR "ext4: Failed to set 64-bit journal feature\n");
+ goto failed_mount4;
+ }
+
/* We have now updated the journal if required, so we can
* validate the data journaling mode. */
switch (test_opt(sb, DATA_FLAGS)) {