On 2017/3/3 2:55, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 03/02, Chao Yu wrote:
>> There is no CP_CRC_RECOVERY_FLAG tagged in checkpoint pack, calculate
>> cp_version as old format.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuch...@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> fs/f2fs/node.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c
>> index 6c027b6833f4..0d46404ca769 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
>> @@ -2507,7 +2507,9 @@ static int __get_nat_bitmaps(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>> f2fs_put_page(page, 1);
>> }
>>
>> - cp_ver |= (cur_cp_crc(ckpt) << 32);
>> + if (__is_set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_CRC_RECOVERY_FLAG))
>> + cp_ver |= (cur_cp_crc(ckpt) << 32);
>
> Well, we always write nat_bits with crc. So if it's different, something is
> wrong and we need to drop it.
Got it. :)
Thanks,
> CP-CRC_RECOVERY_FLAG is used for roll-forward recovery, which is a different
> context.
>
>> +
>> if (cpu_to_le64(cp_ver) != *(__le64 *)nm_i->nat_bits) {
>> disable_nat_bits(sbi, true);
>> return 0;
>> --
>> 2.8.2.295.g3f1c1d0
>
> .
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
