Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:55:49 +0200 | From | Klaus Strebel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] XFS fix remount rw with unrecognized options |
| |
Jianjun Kong schrieb: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:29:26AM +1100, Tim Shimmin wrote: >> Resending as I mangled sending the mail from home last time. Sorry. >> >> Please include the following patch for 2.6.27.1 stable release as >> suggested by Christoph Hellwig and Eric Sandeen. >> It fixes a regression in the recent remount recoding >> where remounting say from ro to rw allows the xfs flags to >> be out of sync with the vfs flags, resulting >> in failures for some programs such as touch (which end up calling xfs_setattr). >> The fix is a very minor and clear. >> >> Thanks, >> Tim. >> >> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 14:30:44 +0200 >> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> >> To: xfs@oss.sgi.com >> Subject: [PATCH] fix remount rw with unrecognized options >> >> When we skip unrecognized options in xfs_fs_remount we should just break >> out of the switch and not return because otherwise we may skip clearing >> the xfs-internal read-only flag. This will only show up on some >> operations like touch because most read-only checks are done by the VFS >> which thinks this filesystem is r/w. Eventually we should replace the >> XFS read-only flag with a helper that always checks the VFS flag to make >> sure they can never get out of sync. >> >> Bug reported and fix verified by Marcel Beister on #xfs. >> Bug fix verified by updated xfstests/189. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> >> Acked-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> >> Signed-off-by: Timothy Shimmin <tes@sgi.com> >> >> Index: mainline/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c >> =================================================================== >> --- mainline.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c 2008-10-15 17:59:26.542652847 +1100 >> +++ mainline/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c 2008-10-15 17:59:45.376217172 +1100 >> @@ -1323,7 +1323,7 @@ xfs_fs_remount( >> "XFS: mount option \"%s\" not supported for remount\n", p); >> return -EINVAL; >> #else >> - return 0; >> + break; >> #endif >> } >> } > > > And the code above "return 0" can not be executed, so delete them. > __________________________________________ > #if 0 > printk(KERN_INFO > "XFS: mount option \"%s\" not supported for remount\n", p); > return -EINVAL; > #else > return 0; > ----------------------------------------- > > > Signed-off-by: Jianjun Kong <kongjianjun@gmail.com> > --- > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c | 7 +------ > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c > index e390136..bd5ec81 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c > @@ -1318,12 +1318,7 @@ xfs_fs_remount( > * every remount request, and silently ignore all > * options that we can't actually change. > */ > -#if 0 > - printk(KERN_INFO > - "XFS: mount option \"%s\" not supported for remount\n", p); > - return -EINVAL; > -#else > - break; > + break 0; > #endif > } > } I see my compilers error message '"#endif" without corresponding "#if"' and i think he'll also dislike the 'break 0;' ... 'missing ";" before "0" in line xxx' ;-).
-- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / best regards
Klaus Strebel, Dipl.-Inform. (FH), mailto:klaus.strebel@gmx.net
/"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \ -- 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/
| |