From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/12] xfs: more and better verifiers
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 10:06:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170818170607.GK4796@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170818070516.GA15291@infradead.org>
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 12:05:16AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 04:31:29PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > This RFC combines all the random little fixes and improvements to the
> > verifiers that we've been talking about for the past month or so into a
> > single patch series!
> >
> > We start by refactoring the long format btree block header verifier into
> > a single helper functionn and de-macroing dir block verifiers to make
> > them less shouty. Next, we change verifier functions to return the
> > approximate instruction pointer of the faulting test so that we can
> > report more precise fault information to dmesg/tracepoints.
>
> Just jumping here quickly because I don't have time for a detailed
> review:
>
> How good does this instruction pointer thing resolved to the actual
> issue?
Ugh, it's terrible once you turn on the optimizer.
if (!xfs_sb_version_hascrc(&mp->m_sb))
return __this_address;
if (!uuid_equal(&block->bb_u.s.bb_uuid, &mp->m_sb.sb_meta_uuid))
return __this_address;
if (block->bb_u.s.bb_blkno != cpu_to_be64(bp->b_bn))
return __this_address;
if (pag && be32_to_cpu(block->bb_u.s.bb_owner) != pag->pag_agno)
return __this_address;
return NULL;
becomes:
if (!xfs_sb_version_hascrc(&mp->m_sb))
goto out;
if (!uuid_equal(&block->bb_u.s.bb_uuid, &mp->m_sb.sb_meta_uuid))
goto out;
if (block->bb_u.s.bb_blkno != cpu_to_be64(bp->b_bn))
goto out;
if (pag && be32_to_cpu(block->bb_u.s.bb_owner) != pag->pag_agno)
goto out;
return NULL;
out:
return __this_address;
...which is totally worthless, unless we want to compile all the verifier
functions with __attribute__((optimize("O0"))), which is bogus.
<sigh> Back to the drawing board on that one.
--D
> I'm currently watching a customer issue where a write verifier
> triggers, and I gave them a patch to add a debug print to every failing
> statement, including printing out the mismatch values if it's not
> simply a binary comparism. I though about preparing that patch as
> well as others for mainline. Here is the one I have at the moment:
>
> ---
> From 6c5e2efc6f857228461d439feb3c98be58fb9744 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2017 16:34:15 +0200
> Subject: xfs: print verbose information on dir leaf verifier failures
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c
> index b887fb2a2bcf..4386c68f72c6 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c
> @@ -113,27 +113,37 @@ xfs_dir3_leaf_check_int(
> * Should factor in the size of the bests table as well.
> * We can deduce a value for that from di_size.
> */
> - if (hdr->count > ops->leaf_max_ents(geo))
> + if (hdr->count > ops->leaf_max_ents(geo)) {
> + xfs_warn(mp, "count (%d) above max (%d)\n",
> + hdr->count, ops->leaf_max_ents(geo));
> return false;
> + }
>
> /* Leaves and bests don't overlap in leaf format. */
> if ((hdr->magic == XFS_DIR2_LEAF1_MAGIC ||
> hdr->magic == XFS_DIR3_LEAF1_MAGIC) &&
> - (char *)&ents[hdr->count] > (char *)xfs_dir2_leaf_bests_p(ltp))
> + (char *)&ents[hdr->count] > (char *)xfs_dir2_leaf_bests_p(ltp)) {
> + xfs_warn(mp, "ents overlappings bests\n");
> return false;
> + }
>
> /* Check hash value order, count stale entries. */
> for (i = stale = 0; i < hdr->count; i++) {
> if (i + 1 < hdr->count) {
> if (be32_to_cpu(ents[i].hashval) >
> - be32_to_cpu(ents[i + 1].hashval))
> + be32_to_cpu(ents[i + 1].hashval)) {
> + xfs_warn(mp, "broken hash order\n");
> return false;
> + }
> }
> if (ents[i].address == cpu_to_be32(XFS_DIR2_NULL_DATAPTR))
> stale++;
> }
> - if (hdr->stale != stale)
> + if (hdr->stale != stale) {
> + xfs_warn(mp, "incorrect stalte count (%d, expected %d)\n",
> + hdr->stale, stale);
> return false;
> + }
> return true;
> }
>
> @@ -159,12 +169,21 @@ xfs_dir3_leaf_verify(
> magic3 = (magic == XFS_DIR2_LEAF1_MAGIC) ? XFS_DIR3_LEAF1_MAGIC
> : XFS_DIR3_LEAFN_MAGIC;
>
> - if (leaf3->info.hdr.magic != cpu_to_be16(magic3))
> + if (leaf3->info.hdr.magic != cpu_to_be16(magic3)) {
> + xfs_warn(mp, "incorrect magic number (0x%hx, expected 0x%hx)\n",
> + leaf3->info.hdr.magic, magic3);
> return false;
> - if (!uuid_equal(&leaf3->info.uuid, &mp->m_sb.sb_meta_uuid))
> + }
> + if (!uuid_equal(&leaf3->info.uuid, &mp->m_sb.sb_meta_uuid)) {
> + xfs_warn(mp, "incorrect uuid, (%pUb, expected %pUb)\n",
> + &leaf3->info.uuid, &mp->m_sb.sb_meta_uuid);
> return false;
> - if (be64_to_cpu(leaf3->info.blkno) != bp->b_bn)
> + }
> + if (be64_to_cpu(leaf3->info.blkno) != bp->b_bn) {
> + xfs_warn(mp, "incorrect blkno, (%lld, expected %lld)\n",
> + be64_to_cpu(leaf3->info.blkno), bp->b_bn);
> return false;
> + }
> if (!xfs_log_check_lsn(mp, be64_to_cpu(leaf3->info.lsn)))
> return false;
> } else {
> --
> 2.11.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-18 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-17 23:31 [RFC 00/12] xfs: more and better verifiers Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 01/12] xfs: refactor long-format btree header verification routines Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 02/12] xfs: remove XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN from dir3 data verifiers Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 03/12] xfs: have buffer verifier functions report failing address Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19 2:19 ` [PATCH v2 " Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 04/12] xfs: refactor verifier callers to print address of failing check Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 05/12] xfs: verify dinode header first Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 06/12] xfs: move inode fork verifiers to xfs_dinode_verify Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 07/12] xfs: create structure verifier function for shortform xattrs Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 08/12] xfs: create structure verifier function for short form symlinks Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 09/12] xfs: refactor short form directory structure verifier function Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 10/12] xfs: provide a centralized method for verifying inline fork data Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 11/12] xfs: fail out of xfs_attr3_leaf_lookup_int if it looks corrupt Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 12/12] xfs: create a new buf_ops pointer to verify structure metadata Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-18 7:05 ` [RFC 00/12] xfs: more and better verifiers Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-18 17:06 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2017-08-18 18:45 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-18 18:59 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19 0:33 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-19 0:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19 1:12 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-19 1:17 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19 23:20 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-21 8:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-29 15:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-29 16:57 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-29 22:22 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31 0:10 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-31 2:43 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31 3:05 ` Eric Sandeen
2017-08-31 3:27 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31 5:44 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-31 23:37 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31 23:49 ` Darrick J. Wong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170818170607.GK4796@magnolia \
--to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.