vitalif
/
e2fsprogs
mirror of https://github.com/vitalif/e2fsprogs
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Releases Wiki Activity

e2fsck: remove 'invalid' wording from error when extent block fails checksum 

Don't say the physical block number is invalid if an extent block
fails only the checksum.  It passes checks, so it's not invalid.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
crypto
Darrick J. Wong 2014-12-03 00:01:44 -05:00 committed by Theodore Ts'o
parent dc7b8dad99
commit a93a90d2ae
3 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
e2fsck/problem.c
View File

@ -998,7 +998,7 @@ static struct e2fsck_problem problem_table[] = {
*/
{ PR_1_EXTENT_ONLY_CSUM_INVALID,
N_("@i %i extent block passes checks, but checksum does not match "
"extent\n\t(logical @b %c, @n physical @b %b, len %N)\n"),
"extent\n\t(logical @b %c, physical @b %b, len %N)\n"),
PROMPT_FIX, 0 },
/*

2
tests/f_extent_int_bad_csum/expect.1
View File

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Inode 12 extent block passes checks, but checksum does not match extent
(logical block 698, invalid physical block 1788, len 1)
(logical block 698, physical block 1788, len 1)
Fix? yes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure

2
tests/f_extent_leaf_bad_csum/expect.1
View File

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Inode 12 extent block passes checks, but checksum does not match extent
(logical block 7, invalid physical block 1090, len 1)
(logical block 7, physical block 1090, len 1)
Fix? yes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure