Please don't reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by using the
following link:
https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11324
(From update of attachment 9373)
>+static int __ext4_ext_check_header(const char *function, struct inode *inode,
>+ struct ext4_extent_header *eh,
>+ int depth)
>+{
>+ const char *error_msg = NULL;
>+ int max = 0;
>+
>+ if (unlikely(eh->eh_magic != EXT4_EXT_MAGIC)) {
>+ error_msg = "invalid magic";
>+ goto corrupted;
>+ }
>+ if (unlikely(le16_to_cpu(eh->eh_depth) != depth)) {
>+ error_msg = "unexpected eh_depth";
>+ goto corrupted;
>+ }
Could we change this to allow eh->eh_depth <= depth? That would allow e2fsck
more leeway in fixing up extent corruptions, instead of having to do a full
tree rebalance.
>+ max = ext4_ext_max_entries(inode, depth);
>+ if (unlikely(le16_to_cpu(eh->eh_max) > max)) {
>+ error_msg = "too large eh_max";
>+ goto corrupted;
>+ }
In e2fsck I also check if eh->eh_max < max - 2. This allows up to 2 items at
the end of the block for e.g. ext3_extent_tail to hold inum+gen+checksum, and
possibly another extension.
_______________________________________________
Lustre-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-devel
