From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Apr 26 21:30:24 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82BB6106564A
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 21:30:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rick@kiwi-computer.com)
Received: from kiwi-computer.com (keira.kiwi-computer.com [63.224.10.3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 16CBA8FC0C
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 21:30:23 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rick@kiwi-computer.com)
Received: (qmail 51951 invoked by uid 2001); 26 Apr 2009 21:03:43 -0000
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 16:03:43 -0500
From: "Rick C. Petty" <rick-freebsd2008@kiwi-computer.com>
To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Message-ID: <20090426210343.GA51829@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0904261651460.4478@muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0904261651460.4478@muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Why do some ufs i-node fields have 2 copies?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: rick-freebsd2008@kiwi-computer.com
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 21:30:24 -0000

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 04:56:03PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> 
> I was just wondering if anyone conversant with ufs/ffs could tell me why
> the following fields of the i-node have off-disk and on-disk copies?
> (One thought I had was that these fields are sometimes set to values
>  that shouldn't get saved on-disk, but it was just a hunch.)

> 	/*
> 	 * Copies from the on-disk dinode itself.
> 	 */
> 	u_int16_t i_mode;	/* IFMT, permissions; see below. */
> 	int16_t	  i_nlink;	/* File link count. */
> 	u_int64_t i_size;	/* File byte count. */
> 	u_int32_t i_flags;	/* Status flags (chflags). */
> 	int64_t	  i_gen;	/* Generation number. */
> 	u_int32_t i_uid;	/* File owner. */
> 	u_int32_t i_gid;	/* File group. */
> 	/*
> 	 * The real copy of the on-disk inode.

You missed a few lines:

       union {
                struct ufs1_dinode *din1;       /* UFS1 on-disk dinode. */
                struct ufs2_dinode *din2;       /* UFS2 on-disk dinode. */
        } dinode_u;

The reason is that the first set (the "copies") are what are referenced by
the ffs/ufs code.  The real copies are what came from the disk (hence the
"on-disk").  Because UFS1 & UFS2 have such different dinode structures, the
copies are moved to/from the dinode structures when the inode is read to or
written from the disk.  At all other times, the "copies" are used.

-- Rick C. Petty