[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD14+f0D9CVmBZGmbMcKB7xAHvBrbGAgVxR4W8Fiu0Vo6czDYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 20:43:29 +0900
From: Ju Hyung Park <qkrwngud825@...il.com>
To: Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: relocate chksum_offset for
large_nat_bitmap feature
Hi Chao,
On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 6:34 PM Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com> wrote:
> + if (__is_set_ckpt_flags(*cp_block, CP_LARGE_NAT_BITMAP_FLAG)) {
> + if (crc_offset != CP_MIN_CHKSUM_OFFSET) {
> + f2fs_put_page(*cp_page, 1);
> + f2fs_msg(sbi->sb, KERN_WARNING,
> + "layout of large_nat_bitmap is deprecated, "
> + "run fsck to repair, chksum_offset: %zu",
> + crc_offset);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + }
> +
I try not to be a Grammar Nazi and a jerk on every patches, but since
this is a message a user would directly encounter, I'd like to see a
bit less ambiguous message.
How about "using deprecated layout of large_nat_bitmap, please run
fsck v1.13.0 or higher to repair, chksum_offset: %zu"?
The original message seems to suggest that large_nat_bitmap is
deprecated outright.
Also, I'd like to suggest to write down an actual version of
f2fs-tools here as we've seen older versions of fsck doing even more
damage and the users might not have the latest f2fs-tools installed.
Btw, what happens if we use the latest fsck to fix the corrupted image
and use the older kernel to mount it?
Would it even mount?
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists