From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND] xfs: introduce xfs_validate_stripe_geometry()
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 09:24:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201014132413.GB1109375@bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201014074550.20552-1-hsiangkao@redhat.com>
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 03:45:50PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Introduce a common helper to consolidate stripe validation process.
> Also make kernel code xfs_validate_sb_common() use it first.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
> [v3 RESEND]:
> sorry forget to drop a pair of unnecessary brace brackets.
>
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201013034853.28236-1-hsiangkao@redhat.com
>
> Changes since v2:
> - update the expression on sb_unit and hasdalign check (Brian);
> - drop parentheses since modulus operation is a basic
> math operation (Brian);
> - (I missed earlier..) avoid div_s64_rem on modulus operation
> by checking swidth, sunit range first and casting to 32-bit
> integer. since sunit/swidth in the callers are in FSB or BB,
> so need to check the overflow first...
>
> Anyway, since logic change is made due to div_s64_rem() issue,
> please kindly help review again...
>
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang
>
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.h | 3 ++
> 2 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> index 5aeafa59ed27..2078f4fe93b2 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> @@ -360,21 +360,18 @@ xfs_validate_sb_common(
> }
> }
>
> - if (sbp->sb_unit) {
> - if (!xfs_sb_version_hasdalign(sbp) ||
> - sbp->sb_unit > sbp->sb_width ||
> - (sbp->sb_width % sbp->sb_unit) != 0) {
> - xfs_notice(mp, "SB stripe unit sanity check failed");
> - return -EFSCORRUPTED;
> - }
> - } else if (xfs_sb_version_hasdalign(sbp)) {
> + /*
> + * Either (sb_unit and !hasdalign) or (!sb_unit and hasdalign)
> + * would imply the image is corrupted.
> + */
> + if (!!sbp->sb_unit ^ xfs_sb_version_hasdalign(sbp)) {
> xfs_notice(mp, "SB stripe alignment sanity check failed");
> return -EFSCORRUPTED;
> - } else if (sbp->sb_width) {
> - xfs_notice(mp, "SB stripe width sanity check failed");
> - return -EFSCORRUPTED;
> }
>
> + if (!xfs_validate_stripe_geometry(mp, XFS_FSB_TO_B(mp, sbp->sb_unit),
> + XFS_FSB_TO_B(mp, sbp->sb_width), 0, false))
> + return -EFSCORRUPTED;
>
> if (xfs_sb_version_hascrc(&mp->m_sb) &&
> sbp->sb_blocksize < XFS_MIN_CRC_BLOCKSIZE) {
> @@ -1233,3 +1230,61 @@ xfs_sb_get_secondary(
> *bpp = bp;
> return 0;
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * sunit, swidth, sectorsize(optional with 0) should be all in bytes,
> + * so users won't be confused by values in error messages.
> + */
> +bool
> +xfs_validate_stripe_geometry(
> + struct xfs_mount *mp,
> + __s64 sunit,
> + __s64 swidth,
> + int sectorsize,
> + bool silent)
> +{
> + if (swidth > INT_MAX) {
> + if (!silent)
> + xfs_notice(mp,
> +"stripe width (%lld) is too large", swidth);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + if (sunit > swidth) {
> + if (!silent)
> + xfs_notice(mp,
> +"stripe unit (%lld) is larger than the stripe width (%lld)", sunit, swidth);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + if (sectorsize && (int)sunit % sectorsize) {
> + if (!silent)
> + xfs_notice(mp,
> +"stripe unit (%lld) must be a multiple of the sector size (%d)",
> + sunit, sectorsize);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + if (sunit && !swidth) {
> + if (!silent)
> + xfs_notice(mp,
> +"invalid stripe unit (%lld) and stripe width of 0", sunit);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + if (!sunit && swidth) {
> + if (!silent)
> + xfs_notice(mp,
> +"invalid stripe width (%lld) and stripe unit of 0", swidth);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + if (sunit && (int)swidth % (int)sunit) {
> + if (!silent)
> + xfs_notice(mp,
> +"stripe width (%lld) must be a multiple of the stripe unit (%lld)",
> + swidth, sunit);
> + return false;
> + }
> + return true;
> +}
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.h b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.h
> index 92465a9a5162..f79f9dc632b6 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.h
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.h
> @@ -42,4 +42,7 @@ extern int xfs_sb_get_secondary(struct xfs_mount *mp,
> struct xfs_trans *tp, xfs_agnumber_t agno,
> struct xfs_buf **bpp);
>
> +extern bool xfs_validate_stripe_geometry(struct xfs_mount *mp,
> + __s64 sunit, __s64 swidth, int sectorsize, bool silent);
> +
> #endif /* __XFS_SB_H__ */
> --
> 2.18.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-14 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-13 23:13 [PATCH v3] xfs: introduce xfs_validate_stripe_geometry() Gao Xiang
2020-10-14 7:45 ` [PATCH v3 RESEND] " Gao Xiang
2020-10-14 13:24 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2020-10-14 16:19 ` 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=20201014132413.GB1109375@bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hsiangkao@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
/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.