linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anand Jain <Anand.Jain@oracle.com>
To: linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: btrfs_scan_one_device return error code
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:18:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51468797.9090203@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5141DCB6.6000605@redhat.com>




  As of now a common 'Invalid argument' return code is
  for a set of 5 errors,  that is misleading from
  the end-user context.

  Albeit the proposed return error codes are the closest
  they might not be the perfect though. Since the idea is
  at least if we use 'Invalid argument' only when no
  btrfs SB found, that will solve the bug in this context.

  Any other simpler fix ? or should we go for ioctl arg
  V2 and have room for return error string ? Thanks.

-Anand


>>   /dev/sdc does not contain btrfs SB at all..
>>
>> ---
>>   # btrfs dev scan /dev/sdc
>>   Scanning for Btrfs filesystems in '/dev/sdc'
>>   ERROR: unable to scan the device '/dev/sdc' - Invalid argument
>> ---
>>
>>   here appropriate error is something like
>>   no btrfs found on dev
>>
>>   However btrfs_scan_one_device (kernel) returns -EINVAL
>>   for other errors too
>>
>>   Does the below fix sound reasonable ?



> It's too bad that ioctl arg doesn't have room to pass back
> any other status.
>
> A rev of the ioctl (BTRFS_IOC_SCAN_DEV_V2), which allows
> passing status flags back out, would solve the problem nicely
> I think.


>>
>> --------------
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> index 6b9cff4..d6deae0 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> @@ -808,7 +808,7 @@ int btrfs_scan_one_device(const char *path, fmode_t flags, void *holder,
>>          struct block_device *bdev;
>>          struct page *page;
>>          void *p;
>> -       int ret = -EINVAL;
>> +       int ret = 0;
>>          u64 devid;
>>          u64 transid;
>>          u64 total_devices;
>> @@ -833,24 +833,32 @@ int btrfs_scan_one_device(const char *path, fmode_t flags, void *holder,
>>          }
>>
>>          /* make sure our super fits in the device */
>> -       if (bytenr + PAGE_CACHE_SIZE >= i_size_read(bdev->bd_inode))
>> +       if (bytenr + PAGE_CACHE_SIZE >= i_size_read(bdev->bd_inode)) {
>> +               ret = -ENOSPC;
>>                  goto error_bdev_put;
>> +       }
>>
>>          /* make sure our super fits in the page */
>> -       if (sizeof(*disk_super) > PAGE_CACHE_SIZE)
>> +       if (sizeof(*disk_super) > PAGE_CACHE_SIZE) {
>> +               ret = -ENOMEM;
>>                  goto error_bdev_put;
>> +       }
>>
>>          /* make sure our super doesn't straddle pages on disk */
>>          index = bytenr >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
>> -       if ((bytenr + sizeof(*disk_super) - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT != index)
>> +       if ((bytenr + sizeof(*disk_super) - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT != index) {
>> +               ret = -ENOMEM;
>>                  goto error_bdev_put;
>> +       }
>>
>>          /* pull in the page with our super */
>>          page = read_cache_page_gfp(bdev->bd_inode->i_mapping,
>>                                     index, GFP_NOFS);
>>
>> -       if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(page))
>> +       if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(page)) {
>> +               ret = -EIO;
>>                  goto error_bdev_put;
>> +       }
>>
>>          p = kmap(page);
>>
>> @@ -858,8 +866,10 @@ int btrfs_scan_one_device(const char *path, fmode_t flags, void *holder,
>>          disk_super = p + (bytenr & ~PAGE_CACHE_MASK);
>>
>>          if (btrfs_super_bytenr(disk_super) != bytenr ||
>> -           disk_super->magic != cpu_to_le64(BTRFS_MAGIC))
>> +           disk_super->magic != cpu_to_le64(BTRFS_MAGIC)) {
>> +               ret = -EINVAL;
>>                  goto error_unmap;
>> +       }
>>
>>          devid = btrfs_stack_device_id(&disk_super->dev_item);
>>          transid = btrfs_super_generation(disk_super);
>> -------------------

      reply	other threads:[~2013-03-18  3:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-14  8:31 btrfs_scan_one_device return error code Anand Jain
2013-03-14 14:20 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-18  3:18   ` Anand Jain [this message]

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=51468797.9090203@oracle.com \
    --to=anand.jain@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).