[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160809125952.GA17353@pc>
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 13:59:52 +0100
From: Salah Triki <salah.triki@...il.com>
To: Luis de Bethencourt <luisbg@....samsung.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] fs: befs: check flags field to validate the
superblock state
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:40:25PM +0100, Luis de Bethencourt wrote:
> On 09/08/16 13:32, Salah Triki wrote:
> > flags field records the superblock state, so check if it is equal to
> > BEFS_DIRTY.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Salah Triki <salah.triki@...il.com>
> > ---
> > fs/befs/super.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/befs/super.c b/fs/befs/super.c
> > index 5ab75e8..79be409 100644
> > --- a/fs/befs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/befs/super.c
> > @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ befs_check_sb(struct super_block *sb)
> > return BEFS_ERR;
> > }
> >
> > - if (befs_sb->log_start != befs_sb->log_end) {
> > + if (befs_sb->log_start != befs_sb->log_end || befs_sb->flags == BEFS_DIRTY) {
> > befs_error(sb, "Filesystem not clean! There are blocks in the "
> > "journal. You must boot into BeOS and mount this volume "
> > "to make it clean.");
> >
>
> Hi Salah,
>
> Looks like a good idea. Any reason why commit 1/2, where you add the flag, and commit
> 2/2, where you read it, are split and not in the same commit? Curious.
>
> Will test it soon.
>
> Thanks :)
> Luis
Hi Luis,
I split the two commits for sake of clarity. But now I realize that it
is not usefull at all.
Will send a corrected patch soon.
Thanx
Salah
Powered by blists - more mailing lists