[Ocfs2-tools-devel] [PATCH 5/6] Modify fsck to trust global bitmap than super block.take 3

[tao.ma]

Sunil Mushran wrote:
> Tao Ma wrote:
>> In resize, we update the global_bitmap first and then the super block.
>> So if there is any corruption between these 2 steps, there will be a
>> inconsistence. In kernel we use the information in global_bitmap,
>> so fsck.ocfs2 should also trust it during the check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tao Ma <tao.ma at oracle.com>
>> ---
>>   
> Signed-off-by: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran at oracle.com>
>
> This looks correct. However, I am still confused as to how I managed to
> get clean runs when testing aborted offline resize cases.
In your offline resize design, you write this:

    * Segfault after writing global bitmap but before the superblock.

/fsck will remove all the new BGs that are beyond the end-of-volume as 
determined by the superblock->num_clusters.


So we trust superblock rather than global_bitmap and it works as the 
design expects when testing aborted offline resize cases.
Now the order is reversed, so I think maybe I need to revise your design 
doc so that it doesn't lead to the "strange" result.
Agree?
/