lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] fs: introduce check for drop/inc nlink
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 03:27:30PM +0800, cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn wrote:
> > From: Cheng Lin <cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn>
> >
> > Avoid inode nlink overflow or underflow.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Cheng Lin <cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn>
> > ---
> I'm very confused. There's no explanation why that's needed. As it
> stands it's not possible to provide a useful review.
> I'm not saying it's wrong. I just don't understand why and even if this
> should please show up in the commit message.
In an xfs issue, there was an nlink underflow of a directory inode. There
is a key information in the kernel messages, that is the WARN_ON from
drop_nlink(). However, VFS did not prevent the underflow. I'm not sure
if this behavior is inadvertent or specifically designed. As an abnormal
situation, perhaps prohibiting nlink overflow or underflow is a better way
to handle it.
Request for your comment.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-10-13 11:42    [W:0.110 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site