Re: [PATCH] f2fs-tools: use proper address entry count for direct nodes

[Daeho Jeong]

On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 4:26 PM Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 10/03, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> > From: Daeho Jeong <daehojeong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > For direct nodes, we have to use DEF_ADDRS_PER_BLOCK.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <daehojeong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  fsck/fsck.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fsck/fsck.c b/fsck/fsck.c
> > index 78ffdb6..56a7d31 100644
> > --- a/fsck/fsck.c
> > +++ b/fsck/fsck.c
> > @@ -2894,7 +2894,7 @@ static void fsck_failed_reconnect_file_dnode(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> >       fsck->chk.valid_blk_cnt--;
> >       f2fs_clear_main_bitmap(sbi, ni.blk_addr);
> >
> > -     for (i = 0; i < ADDRS_PER_BLOCK(&node->i); i++) {
> > +     for (i = 0; i < DEF_ADDRS_PER_BLOCK; i++) {
>
> It seems we need to use the inode block passing by fsck_failed_reconnect_file().

This function is for direct nodes. Is it correct to use inode block here?

>
> >               addr = le32_to_cpu(node->dn.addr[i]);
> >               if (!addr)
> >                       continue;
>
> 3012                         fsck->chk.valid_blk_cnt--;
> 3013                         if (addr == NEW_ADDR)
>
> And, we also need to skip if addr == COMPRESS_ADDR here?
>
> 3014                                 continue;
> 3015                         f2fs_clear_main_bitmap(sbi, addr);
> 3016                 }
>
> > --
> > 2.42.0.582.g8ccd20d70d-goog