Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: tree-checker: check item_size for dev_item

[Wang Yugui <wangyugui@e16-tech.com>]

Hi,

> >> >>>> A btrfs filesystem failed to boot with this patch.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> corrupt leaf: root=3 block=1081344 slot=0 devid=1 invalid
> >> >>>> item
> >> >>>> size: has 0 expect 98
> >> >>>>


> As Qu suggested to me, would you plase provide output after
> apply of the following diff? (It may crash the kernel if there is *real*
> one invalid dev_item).
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> index 9fd145f1c4bc..5fb981b4b42a 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>  #include "volumes.h"
>  #include "misc.h"
>  #include "btrfs_inode.h"
> +#include "print-tree.h"
> 
>  /*
>   * Error message should follow the following format:
> @@ -977,6 +978,7 @@ static int check_dev_item(struct extent_buffer *leaf,
>         if (unlikely(item_size != sizeof(*ditem))) {
>                 dev_item_err(leaf, slot, "invalid item size: has                 %u expect %zu",
>                              item_size, sizeof(*ditem));
> +               btrfs_print_leaf(leaf);
>                 return -EUCLEAN;
>         }

When I tested this new diag patch, I noticed that I wrongly applied
these 2 patches to 5.15.x.
btrfs-tree-checker-check-item_size-for-inode_item.patch
btrfs-tree-checker-check-item_size-for-dev_item.patch

some depency patches(at least btrfs-drop-the-_nr-from-the-item-helpers.patch,
maybe more) are missed.

In fact, without these depency patches, there are some build warning,
but I failed to noticed them.

so this is just my bad now. sorry.

Best Regards
Wang Yugui (wangyugui@e16-tech.com)
2022/02/06