Fix e2fsck so that it does not complain if the resize_inode feature is

enabled, but s_reserved_gdt_blocks is zero and there is no double indirect
block in the resize inode.  If there are no blocks reserved for on-line
expansion, there is no need for the DIND block to be allocated in the resize
inode.

2 files changed, 9 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/e2fsck/ChangeLog b/e2fsck/ChangeLog
index f9ffac99..332f0c13 100644
--- a/e2fsck/ChangeLog
+++ b/e2fsck/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2005-01-21  Theodore Ts'o  <tytso@mit.edu>
+
+	* super.c (check_resize_inode): If resize feature is set, but
+		s_reserved_gdt_blocks is zero, do not insist that resize
+		inode must have double indirect block.
+
 2005-01-19  Theodore Ts'o  <tytso@mit.edu>
 
 	* unix.c (e2fsck_simple_progress): Use fixed integer math
diff --git a/e2fsck/super.c b/e2fsck/super.c
index 2dff3b3e..2e9e6a8c 100644
--- a/e2fsck/super.c
+++ b/e2fsck/super.c
@@ -368,6 +368,9 @@ void check_resize_inode(e2fsck_t ctx)
 	 * only block in use is the double indirect block
 	 */
 	blk = inode.i_block[EXT2_DIND_BLOCK];
+	if (!blk && !fs->super->s_reserved_gdt_blocks)
+		/* No reserved gdt blocks; no need for dind block */
+		return;
 	for (i=0; i < EXT2_N_BLOCKS; i++) {
 		if (i != EXT2_DIND_BLOCK && inode.i_block[i])
 			break;