ext2 inode size patch - RE: PR kern/124621

[Josh Carroll]

> Ok, I describe my concern once more. I do not object against the checking
> of the inode size. But, if inode size is changed, then some data is added
> to the inode, that could (and usually does, otherwise why extend it ?)
> change intrerpetation of the inode. Thus, we need a verification of the
> fact that simply ignoring added fields does not damage filesystem or
> cause user data corruption. Verification != testing.

Ok, I see your point. I will do some more research into the ext2 inode
structure on disk and see what happens when inode size > 128.

>
> Until we make this work, patch cannot go into the tree.
>

Understood, thanks for your attention.

Regards,
Josh