Linux Btrfs filesystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@kernel.org>
To: bingjingc <bingjingc@synology.com>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, bxxxjxxg@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fstests: btrfs: test incremental send for changed reference paths
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 12:24:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220822112420.GA3115262@falcondesktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220822004932.1280053-1-bingjingc@synology.com>

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 08:49:32AM +0800, bingjingc wrote:
> From: BingJing Chang <bingjingc@synology.com>
> 
> Normally btrfs stores file paths in an array of ref items. However, items
> for the same parent directory can not exceed the size of a leaf. So btrfs
> also store the rest of them in extended ref items alternatively.
> 
> In this test, it creates a large number of links under a directory causing
> the file paths stored in these two ways to be the parent snapshot. And it
> deletes and recreates just an amount of them that can be stored within an
> array of ref items to be the send snapshot. Test that an incremental send
> operation correctly issues link/unlink operations only against new/deleted
> paths, or the receive operation will fail due to a link on an existed path.
> 
> This currently fails on btrfs but is fixed by a kernel patch with the
> commit 3aa5bd367fa5a3 ("btrfs: send: fix sending link commands for
> existing file paths")
> 
> Signed-off-by: BingJing Chang <bingjingc@synology.com>
> ---
>  tests/btrfs/272     | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  tests/btrfs/272.out |  3 ++
>  2 files changed, 100 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100755 tests/btrfs/272
>  create mode 100644 tests/btrfs/272.out
> 
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/272 b/tests/btrfs/272
> new file mode 100755
> index 00000000..e1986de9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/272
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +# Copyright (c) 2022 BingJing Chang.
> +#
> +# FS QA Test No. btrfs/272
> +#
> +# Regression test for btrfs incremental send issue where a link instruction
> +# is sent against an existing path, causing btrfs receive to fail.
> +#
> +# This issue is fixed by the following linux kernel btrfs patch:
> +#
> +#   commit 3aa5bd367fa5a3 ("btrfs: send: fix sending link commands for
> +#   existing file paths")
> +#
> +. ./common/preamble
> +_begin_fstest auto quick send
> +
> +# Override the default cleanup function.
> +_cleanup()
> +{
> +	cd /
> +	rm -fr $send_files_dir
> +	rm -f $tmp.*
> +}
> +
> +# Import common functions.
> +. ./common/filter
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +_supported_fs btrfs

I didn't tell you before, but I wasn't aware back then, that we now have
an annotation to specify kernel commits, se here we should add:

_fixed_by_kernel_commit 3aa5bd367fa5a3 \
	"btrfs: send: fix sending link commands for existing file paths"


> +_require_test
> +_require_scratch
> +_require_fssum
> +
> +send_files_dir=$TEST_DIR/btrfs-test-$seq
> +
> +rm -fr $send_files_dir
> +mkdir $send_files_dir
> +
> +_scratch_mkfs > /dev/null 2>&1
> +_scratch_mount
> +
> +# Create a file and 2000 hard links to the same inode
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog subvolume create $SCRATCH_MNT/vol
> +touch $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/foo
> +for i in {1..2000}; do
> +	link $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/foo $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/$i
> +done
> +
> +# Create a snapshot for a full send operation
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog subvolume snapshot -r $SCRATCH_MNT/vol $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog send -f $send_files_dir/1.snap $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +
> +# Remove 2000 hard links and re-create the last 1000 links
> +for i in {1..2000}; do
> +	rm $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/$i
> +done
> +for i in {1001..2000}; do
> +	link $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/foo $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/$i
> +done
> +
> +# Create another snapshot for an incremental send operation
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog subvolume snapshot -r $SCRATCH_MNT $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2

So I ran the test on an unpatched kernel and it didn't fail!

The reason is that that command is taking a snapshot of $SCRATCH_MNT, when it
should be $SCRATCH_MNT/vol. So it wasn't testing what we were supposed to test.

> +_run_btrfs_util_prog send -p $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1 -f $send_files_dir/2.snap \
> +		     $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2
> +
> +$FSSUM_PROG -A -f -w $send_files_dir/1.fssum $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +$FSSUM_PROG -A -f -w $send_files_dir/2.fssum \
> +	-x $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2/snap1 $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2
> +
> +# Recreate the filesystem by receiving both send streams and verify we get
> +# the same content that the original filesystem had.
> +_scratch_unmount
> +_scratch_mkfs >>$seqres.full 2>&1
> +_scratch_mount
> +
> +# Add the first snapshot to the new filesystem by applying the first send
> +# stream.
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog receive -f $send_files_dir/1.snap $SCRATCH_MNT
> +
> +# The incremental receive operation below used to fail with the following
> +# error:
> +#
> +#    ERROR: link 1238 -> foo failed: File exists
> +#
> +# This is because the path "1238" was stored as an extended ref item in the
> +# original snapshot but as a normal ref item in the next snapshot. The send
> +# operation cannot handle the duplicated paths, which are stored in
> +# different ways, well, so it decides to issue a link operation for the
> +# existing path. This results in the receiver to fail with the above error.
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog receive -f $send_files_dir/2.snap $SCRATCH_MNT

Thanks for following the style of btrfs/241 and putting here an explanation
of why it failed!

Btw, this patch didn't reach the btrfs mailing list, you typed the address as
"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.orgto", an extra "to" at the end.

So I'm adding the list to cc.

Anyway, with those two small changes, the patch will look good to me, then
you can add:

Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>

Thanks for doing this!

> +
> +$FSSUM_PROG -r $send_files_dir/1.fssum $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +$FSSUM_PROG -r $send_files_dir/2.fssum $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2
> +
> +status=0
> +exit
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/272.out b/tests/btrfs/272.out
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..b009b87a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/272.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
> +QA output created by 272
> +OK
> +OK
> -- 
> 2.37.1
> 

       reply	other threads:[~2022-08-22 11:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20220822004932.1280053-1-bingjingc@synology.com>
2022-08-22 11:24 ` Filipe Manana [this message]
2022-08-24 10:43   ` [PATCH v2] fstests: btrfs: test incremental send for changed reference paths bingjing chang
     [not found] ` <20220823125234.j5mlgzbbq4pmvfub@zlang-mailbox>
2022-08-24 10:42   ` bingjing chang

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=20220822112420.GA3115262@falcondesktop \
    --to=fdmanana@kernel.org \
    --cc=bingjingc@synology.com \
    --cc=bxxxjxxg@gmail.com \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox