Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RFC: Bug in ext2? | From | "Carsten Otte" <> | Date | Wed, 16 Jan 2002 14:52:56 +0100 |
| |
Hello kernel-list-readers,
I am currently reviewing the second extended fs. I found the following code in fs/ext2/super.c (taken from kernel 2.4.17):
static int ext2_setup_super (struct super_block * sb, struct ext2_super_block * es, int read_only) { int res = 0; if (le32_to_cpu(es->s_rev_level) > EXT2_MAX_SUPP_REV) { printk ("EXT2-fs warning: revision level too high, " "forcing read-only mode\n"); res = MS_RDONLY; } if (read_only) return res; ------------------8<-------------------------------*SNIPP* ext2_write_super(sb); ------------------8<-------------------------------*SNIPP* return res; } To me, it looks like if the fs revision in the super block is higher than the supported one while read_only is false, the result is set to MS_RDONLY, but the super block will be written anyway. I'd expect that MS_RDONLY should be returned at the beginning of the funcion & the super block of a fs with an unsupported revision should _not_ be written. Am I getting s.th. wrong?
mit freundlichem Gruß / with kind regards Carsten Otte
IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH Linux for eServer development - device driver team Phone: +49/07031/16-4076 IBM internal phone: *120-4076 -- We are Linux. Resistance indicates that you're missing the point!
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |