From: Mark Harmstone <mark@harmstone.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Mark Harmstone <mark@harmstone.com>, Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
Subject: [PATCH v5 03/16] btrfs: allow remapped chunks to have zero stripes
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 17:14:27 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251110171511.20900-4-mark@harmstone.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251110171511.20900-1-mark@harmstone.com>
When a chunk has been fully remapped, we are going to set its
num_stripes to 0, as it will no longer represent a physical location on
disk.
Change tree-checker to allow for this, and fix read_one_chunk() to avoid
a divide by zero.
Signed-off-by: Mark Harmstone <mark@harmstone.com>
Reviewed-by: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
---
fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 7 ++++-
2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
index 681c5c7fae35..b6827c2a7815 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
@@ -816,6 +816,41 @@ static void chunk_err(const struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
va_end(args);
}
+static bool valid_stripe_count(u64 profile, u16 num_stripes,
+ u16 sub_stripes)
+{
+ switch (profile) {
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0:
+ return true;
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10:
+ return sub_stripes ==
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID10].sub_stripes;
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1:
+ return num_stripes ==
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID1].devs_min;
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1C3:
+ return num_stripes ==
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID1C3].devs_min;
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1C4:
+ return num_stripes ==
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID1C4].devs_min;
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5:
+ return num_stripes >=
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID5].devs_min;
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID6:
+ return num_stripes >=
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID6].devs_min;
+ case BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP:
+ return num_stripes ==
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_DUP].dev_stripes;
+ case 0: /* SINGLE */
+ return num_stripes ==
+ btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_SINGLE].dev_stripes;
+ default:
+ BUG();
+ }
+}
+
/*
* The common chunk check which could also work on super block sys chunk array.
*
@@ -839,6 +874,7 @@ int btrfs_check_chunk_valid(const struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
u64 features;
u32 chunk_sector_size;
bool mixed = false;
+ bool remapped;
int raid_index;
int nparity;
int ncopies;
@@ -862,12 +898,14 @@ int btrfs_check_chunk_valid(const struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
ncopies = btrfs_raid_array[raid_index].ncopies;
nparity = btrfs_raid_array[raid_index].nparity;
- if (unlikely(!num_stripes)) {
+ remapped = type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_REMAPPED;
+
+ if (unlikely(!remapped && !num_stripes)) {
chunk_err(fs_info, leaf, chunk, logical,
"invalid chunk num_stripes, have %u", num_stripes);
return -EUCLEAN;
}
- if (unlikely(num_stripes < ncopies)) {
+ if (unlikely(num_stripes != 0 && num_stripes < ncopies)) {
chunk_err(fs_info, leaf, chunk, logical,
"invalid chunk num_stripes < ncopies, have %u < %d",
num_stripes, ncopies);
@@ -965,22 +1003,9 @@ int btrfs_check_chunk_valid(const struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
}
}
- if (unlikely((type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10 &&
- sub_stripes != btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID10].sub_stripes) ||
- (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 &&
- num_stripes != btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID1].devs_min) ||
- (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1C3 &&
- num_stripes != btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID1C3].devs_min) ||
- (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1C4 &&
- num_stripes != btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID1C4].devs_min) ||
- (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 &&
- num_stripes < btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID5].devs_min) ||
- (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID6 &&
- num_stripes < btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_RAID6].devs_min) ||
- (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP &&
- num_stripes != btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_DUP].dev_stripes) ||
- ((type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) == 0 &&
- num_stripes != btrfs_raid_array[BTRFS_RAID_SINGLE].dev_stripes))) {
+ if (!remapped &&
+ !valid_stripe_count(type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK,
+ num_stripes, sub_stripes)) {
chunk_err(fs_info, leaf, chunk, logical,
"invalid num_stripes:sub_stripes %u:%u for profile %llu",
num_stripes, sub_stripes,
@@ -1004,11 +1029,11 @@ static int check_leaf_chunk_item(struct extent_buffer *leaf,
struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = leaf->fs_info;
int num_stripes;
- if (unlikely(btrfs_item_size(leaf, slot) < sizeof(struct btrfs_chunk))) {
+ if (unlikely(btrfs_item_size(leaf, slot) < offsetof(struct btrfs_chunk, stripe))) {
chunk_err(fs_info, leaf, chunk, key->offset,
"invalid chunk item size: have %u expect [%zu, %u)",
btrfs_item_size(leaf, slot),
- sizeof(struct btrfs_chunk),
+ offsetof(struct btrfs_chunk, stripe),
BTRFS_LEAF_DATA_SIZE(fs_info));
return -EUCLEAN;
}
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 97aea6e8d6bb..ca3bbbd3b213 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -7047,7 +7047,12 @@ static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_key *key, struct extent_buffer *leaf,
*/
map->sub_stripes = btrfs_raid_array[index].sub_stripes;
map->verified_stripes = 0;
- map->stripe_size = btrfs_calc_stripe_length(map);
+
+ if (num_stripes > 0)
+ map->stripe_size = btrfs_calc_stripe_length(map);
+ else
+ map->stripe_size = 0;
+
for (i = 0; i < num_stripes; i++) {
map->stripes[i].physical =
btrfs_stripe_offset_nr(leaf, chunk, i);
--
2.51.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-10 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-10 17:14 [PATCH v5 00/16] Remap tree Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 01/16] btrfs: add definitions and constants for remap-tree Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 02/16] btrfs: add REMAP chunk type Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` Mark Harmstone [this message]
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 04/16] btrfs: remove remapped block groups from the free-space tree Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 05/16] btrfs: don't add metadata items for the remap tree to the extent tree Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 06/16] btrfs: add extended version of struct block_group_item Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 07/16] btrfs: allow mounting filesystems with remap-tree incompat flag Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 08/16] btrfs: redirect I/O for remapped block groups Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 09/16] btrfs: handle deletions from remapped block group Mark Harmstone
2025-11-12 5:14 ` Boris Burkov
2025-11-12 18:51 ` Mark Harmstone
2025-11-13 11:09 ` Mark Harmstone
2025-11-12 6:15 ` Boris Burkov
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 10/16] btrfs: handle setting up relocation of block group with remap-tree Mark Harmstone
2025-11-12 5:35 ` Boris Burkov
2025-11-12 17:38 ` Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 11/16] btrfs: move existing remaps before relocating block group Mark Harmstone
2025-11-12 5:41 ` Boris Burkov
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 12/16] btrfs: replace identity remaps with actual remaps when doing relocations Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 13/16] btrfs: add do_remap param to btrfs_discard_extent() Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 14/16] btrfs: allow balancing remap tree Mark Harmstone
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 15/16] btrfs: handle discarding fully-remapped block groups Mark Harmstone
2025-11-12 5:55 ` Boris Burkov
2025-11-10 17:14 ` [PATCH v5 16/16] btrfs: populate fully_remapped_bgs_list on mount Mark Harmstone
2025-11-12 5:57 ` Boris Burkov
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=20251110171511.20900-4-mark@harmstone.com \
--to=mark@harmstone.com \
--cc=boris@bur.io \
--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