From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: piaojun Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 14:45:54 +0800 Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: return -EROFS to upper if inode block is invalid In-Reply-To: <57d632e3-bb5b-3b5a-102f-d7d541f83587@gmail.com> References: <5A41AFE2.5010506@huawei.com> <5A41DFBD.5080704@huawei.com> <57d632e3-bb5b-3b5a-102f-d7d541f83587@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5A41F022.6040400@huawei.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com Hi Joseph, On 2017/12/26 14:10, Joseph Qi wrote: > > > On 17/12/26 13:35, piaojun wrote: >> Hi Joseph, >> >> On 2017/12/26 11:05, Joseph Qi wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 17/12/26 10:11, piaojun wrote: >>>> If metadata is corrupted such as 'invalid inode block', we will get >>>> failed by calling 'mount()' as below: >>>> >>>> ocfs2_mount >>>> ocfs2_initialize_super >>>> ocfs2_init_global_system_inodes : return -EINVAL if inode is NULL >>>> ocfs2_get_system_file_inode >>>> _ocfs2_get_system_file_inode : return NULL if inode is errno >>> Do you mean inode is bad? >>> >> Here we have to face two abnormal cases: >> 1. inode is bad; >> 2. read inode from disk failed due to bad storage link. >>>> ocfs2_iget >>>> ocfs2_read_locked_inode >>>> ocfs2_validate_inode_block >>>> >>>> In this situation we need return -EROFS to upper application, so that >>>> user can fix it by fsck. And then mount again. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jun Piao >>>> Reviewed-by: Alex Chen >>>> --- >>>> fs/ocfs2/super.c | 10 ++++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/super.c b/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>>> index 040bbb6..dea21a7 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>>> @@ -474,7 +474,10 @@ static int ocfs2_init_global_system_inodes(struct ocfs2_super *osb) >>>> new = ocfs2_get_system_file_inode(osb, i, osb->slot_num); >>>> if (!new) { >>>> ocfs2_release_system_inodes(osb); >>>> - status = -EINVAL; >>>> + if (ocfs2_is_soft_readonly(osb)) >>> I'm afraid that having bad inode doesn't means ocfs2 is readonly. >>> And the calling application is mount.ocfs2. So do you mean mount.ocfs2 >>> have to handle EROFS like printing corresponding error log? >>> >> I agree that 'bad inode' also means other abnormal cases like >> 'bad storage link' or 'no memory', but we can distinguish that by >> ocfs2_is_soft_readonly(). I found that 'mount.ocfs2' did not >> distinguish any error type and just return 1 for all error cases. I >> wonder if we should return the exact errno for users? >> Soft readonly is an in-memory status. The case you described is just > trying to read inode and then check if it is bad. So where to set the > status before? > we set readonly status in the following process: ocfs2_validate_inode_block() ocfs2_error ocfs2_handle_error ocfs2_set_ro_flag(osb, 0); I have a suggestion that we could distinguish readonly status in 'mount.ocfs2', and return -EROFS to users so that they can fix it. >> thanks, >> Jun >> >>>> + status = -EROFS; >>>> + else >>>> + status = -EINVAL; >>>> mlog_errno(status); >>>> /* FIXME: Should ERROR_RO_FS */ >>>> mlog(ML_ERROR, "Unable to load system inode %d, " >>>> @@ -505,7 +508,10 @@ static int ocfs2_init_local_system_inodes(struct ocfs2_super *osb) >>>> new = ocfs2_get_system_file_inode(osb, i, osb->slot_num); >>>> if (!new) { >>>> ocfs2_release_system_inodes(osb); >>>> - status = -EINVAL; >>>> + if (ocfs2_is_soft_readonly(osb)) >>>> + status = -EROFS; >>>> + else >>>> + status = -EINVAL; >>>> mlog(ML_ERROR, "status=%d, sysfile=%d, slot=%d\n", >>>> status, i, osb->slot_num); >>>> goto bail; >>>> >>> . >>> > . >