3.16.62-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Theodore Ts'o tytso@mit.edu
commit 5f8c10936fab2b69a487400f2872902e597dd320 upstream.
An online resize of a file system with the bigalloc feature enabled and a 1k block size would be refused since ext4_resize_begin() did not understand s_first_data_block is 0 for all bigalloc file systems, even when the block size is 1k.
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o tytso@mit.edu Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings ben@decadent.org.uk --- fs/ext4/resize.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/fs/ext4/resize.c +++ b/fs/ext4/resize.c @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
int ext4_resize_begin(struct super_block *sb) { + struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb); int ret = 0;
if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE)) @@ -28,7 +29,7 @@ int ext4_resize_begin(struct super_block * because the user tools have no way of handling this. Probably a * bad time to do it anyways. */ - if (EXT4_SB(sb)->s_sbh->b_blocknr != + if (EXT4_B2C(sbi, sbi->s_sbh->b_blocknr) != le32_to_cpu(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_es->s_first_data_block)) { ext4_warning(sb, "won't resize using backup superblock at %llu", (unsigned long long)EXT4_SB(sb)->s_sbh->b_blocknr);