- User Since
- Mar 27 2017, 5:46 PM (296 w, 5 d)
Dec 30 2021
Dec 10 2021
Nov 28 2021
Nov 19 2021
This version of e2fs_first_dblock check will fail on 1k block size. The
fs->e2fs->e2fs_bcount >= 1024
is always true.
Nov 18 2021
I am working on more complex extents verification logic, but let it to be committed.
The first data block value check should be more complex. See s_first_data_block superblock field here:
Nov 8 2021
I think it will be better to commit another crc16 implementation and then apply 'code duplication fix' by moving function used in both places to independent header. The reason is, that I cannot confirm that it is 'generic' and 'right' crc16 implementation. I can only confirm, that this implementation is suitable for ext2fs.
May 8 2021
May 7 2021
Apr 23 2021
Fix printf message as requested
Make functions inline
Fix and expression order.
Apr 22 2021
Feb 17 2021
Looks good from ext2fs side.
@kib, you mentioned in SUMMARY:
"ext2fs change to reset clusterw on truncation should be a bug fix."
Jul 17 2020
Thank you for fix.
Jun 12 2020
May 17 2020
May 4 2020
Apr 15 2020
As I remember, the task appeared to be more difficult than it was expected by me. More changes appeared to be required to implement, than it was expected from start.
Mar 3 2020
Feb 18 2020
Feb 10 2020
Jan 19 2020
I am not sure that dinode and superblock conversion will be enough, as I checked on linux side, the group descriptors should be converted too, possible same for bitmaps.
"All fields in ext4 are written to disk in little-endian order"
Jul 27 2019
Jul 7 2019
Jun 10 2019
I am not sure about "filesystem has full read and write support for ext4" because there some ext4 features, that uses rarely and we does not support it.
But may be do not dig into the details in this place.
Apr 30 2019
Apr 27 2019
Apr 16 2019
Apr 12 2019
Ok, I will add this change before landing.
- The name "trace" is going to be a bit confusing to users as they already think they're tracing the system. You could drop the "trace" altogether and see if that makes sense.
I prefer to leave it as is to keep consistency with fusefs dtrace probes naming. See: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D19667
Otherwise this looks like a great addition, and thank you for doing it.
Apr 10 2019
Apr 9 2019
Apr 8 2019
Mar 29 2019
Ok, thank you. This is, what I tried to find, to avoid implement it from scratch.
But ok, I will try to find something and check it on ufs too.
Thanks a lot for adding me to review.
But could you please provide some information, how it is possible to test FIOSEEKDATA/FIOSEEKHOLE from user-space side.
I mean, did you write some user-space code to test it or some unit-tests exist somewhere?