On 04/16/2013 07:57 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 03:55:06PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
If one of the copy of the superblock is zero it does not
confirm to us that btrfs isn't there on that disk. When
we are having more than one copy of superblock we should
rather let the for loop to continue to check other copies.
the following test case and results would justify the
fix
mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc -f
mount /dev/sdb /btrfs
dd if=/dev/zero bs=1 count=8 of=/dev/sdc seek=$((64*1024+64))
~/before/btrfs-select-super -s 1 /dev/sdc
using SB copy 1, bytenr 67108864
here btrfs-select-super just wrote superblock to a mounted btrfs
Why does not check_mounted() catch this in the first place? Ie. based on
the status in /proc/mounts not on random bytes in the superblock.
the reason is, as of now /proc/mounts just knows about the devid 1.
Thanks, Anand
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
