On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 05:43:57PM +0300, Stanislav Sedov wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:06:44 +0200 > Kostik Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> mentioned: > > > > > Please see a discussion on the fs@ and reasoning why I declined to commit > > the similar patch. > > > > I'm sorry I've missed that discussion entirely, but I can admit I had all the > same concerns while reviewing the patch, and Alex's comments and Linux code > reading made me fully confident that the modifications are safe and correct. > Let me explain why I think so. > > The extra size added in inodes are used to store additional info like extended > attributes, ACLs and so on. Each inode now has a field just after the legacy > inode format struct that shows hom much additional space has been added to > this particular inode. By analyzing this field the operating system can > interpret > additional data located in inode, if it understand its format (there might be > application and/or OS specific data too). > > Our implementation just ignore this additional fields after > sizeof(ext2fs_inode), > both while reading and writing. Thus we don't interet this data yet we don't > overwrite it.
Then, it is ok if you did read the code and became assured that ignoring the additional inode data is safe. In any case, consider yourself an appointed ext2fs maintainer onward.
pgpOqJLkRtUhG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
