Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 04 Aug 2009 23:15:30 -0500 | From | Eric Sandeen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] XFS: xfs_iformat realtime device target pointer check |
| |
Ramon de Carvalho Valle wrote: > On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 14:11 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Ramon de Carvalho Valle wrote: >>> The xfs_iformat function does not check if the realtime device target pointer >>> is valid when the XFS_DIFLAG_REALTIME flag is set on the ondisk inode >>> structure. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Ramon de Carvalho Valle <ramon@risesecurity.org> >>> Cc: stable <stable@kernel.org> >>> --- >>> fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------ >>> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c >>> index 1f22d65..37d3ee5 100644 >>> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c >>> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c >>> @@ -343,13 +343,24 @@ xfs_iformat( >>> return XFS_ERROR(EFSCORRUPTED); >>> } >>> >>> + if (unlikely((ip->i_d.di_flags & XFS_DIFLAG_REALTIME) && >>> + !ip->i_mount->m_rtdev_targp)) { >>> + xfs_fs_repair_cmn_err(CE_WARN, ip->i_mount, >>> + "corrupt dinode %Lu, flags = 0x%x.", >>> + (unsigned long long)ip->i_ino, >>> + ip->i_d.di_flags); >>> + XFS_CORRUPTION_ERROR("xfs_iformat(3)", XFS_ERRLEVEL_LOW, >>> + ip->i_mount, dip); >> I think I'd rather not change all the corruption text tag ordering; >> it'll make it harder to track down any common occurrences of >> "xfs_iformat(X)" corruption in the future if they get renumbered now. >> >> I'd either make this xfs_iformat(2.1) ;) or just leave it as Christoph >> had. "realtime" is a lot more informative than "3" anyway. > > I don't think this is a bad decision, because the corruption errors can > be easily identified by the output of xfs_fs_repair_cmn_err and the > source line. I think this is a reasonable change that will keep the code > clean and consistent.
Until you wind up looking at a problem from some old kernel, or modified vendor kernel, and you realize that now you really don't know which error "xfs_iformat(6)" is anymore, and you either have to go digging through trees that aren't handy, or you just give up and don't bother to help because now it's too much of a pain. ;)
But I can leave it up to the folks @ sgi, I can see both sides of the argument, and I won't care too much either way.
Thanks, -Eric
> -Ramon > >> -Eric
| |