* [PATCH v4 2/2] Btrfs: scrub raid56 stripes in the right way
@ 2014-04-08 11:18 Wang Shilong
2014-04-10 23:36 ` Chris Mason
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Wang Shilong @ 2014-04-08 11:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-btrfs, clm; +Cc: fengguang.wu, kbuild-all
Steps to reproduce:
# mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sda[8-11] -m raid5 -d raid5
# mount /dev/sda8 /mnt
# btrfs scrub start -BR /mnt
# echo $? <--unverified errors make return value be 3
This is because we don't setup right mapping between physical
and logical address for raid56, which makes checksum mismatch.
But we will find everthing is fine later when rechecking using
btrfs_map_block().
This patch fixed the problem by settuping right mappings and
we only verify data stripes' checksums.
Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
v3->v4: fix compile warnings on avr32 platform.(reported by 0-day LKP)
v2->v3: fix wrong offset set plus some cleanups.
v1->v2: on the right way to fix the problem.
---
fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 108 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 89 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
index db21a13..68a5a26 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
@@ -2235,6 +2235,47 @@ behind_scrub_pages:
return 0;
}
+/*
+ * Given a physical address, this will calculate it's
+ * logical offset. if this is a parity stripe, it will return
+ * the most left data stripe's logical offset.
+ *
+ * return 0 if it is a data stripe, 1 means parity stripe.
+ */
+static int get_raid56_logic_offset(u64 physical, int num,
+ struct map_lookup *map, u64 *offset)
+{
+ int i;
+ int j = 0;
+ u64 stripe_nr;
+ u64 last_offset;
+ int stripe_index;
+ int rot;
+
+ last_offset = (physical - map->stripes[num].physical) *
+ nr_data_stripes(map);
+ *offset = last_offset;
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_data_stripes(map); i++) {
+ *offset = last_offset + i * map->stripe_len;
+
+ stripe_nr = *offset;
+ do_div(stripe_nr, map->stripe_len);
+ do_div(stripe_nr, nr_data_stripes(map));
+
+ /* Work out the disk rotation on this stripe-set */
+ rot = do_div(stripe_nr, map->num_stripes);
+ /* calculate which stripe this data locates */
+ rot += i;
+ stripe_index = rot % map->num_stripes;
+ if (stripe_index == num)
+ return 0;
+ if (stripe_index < num)
+ j++;
+ }
+ *offset = last_offset + j * map->stripe_len;
+ return 1;
+}
+
static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
struct map_lookup *map,
struct btrfs_device *scrub_dev,
@@ -2256,6 +2297,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
u64 physical;
u64 logical;
u64 logic_end;
+ u64 physical_end;
u64 generation;
int mirror_num;
struct reada_control *reada1;
@@ -2269,16 +2311,10 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
u64 extent_len;
struct btrfs_device *extent_dev;
int extent_mirror_num;
- int stop_loop;
-
- if (map->type & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 |
- BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID6)) {
- if (num >= nr_data_stripes(map)) {
- return 0;
- }
- }
+ int stop_loop = 0;
nstripes = length;
+ physical = map->stripes[num].physical;
offset = 0;
do_div(nstripes, map->stripe_len);
if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0) {
@@ -2296,6 +2332,11 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
} else if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP) {
increment = map->stripe_len;
mirror_num = num % map->num_stripes + 1;
+ } else if (map->type & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 |
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID6)) {
+ get_raid56_logic_offset(physical, num, map, &offset);
+ increment = map->stripe_len * nr_data_stripes(map);
+ mirror_num = 1;
} else {
increment = map->stripe_len;
mirror_num = 1;
@@ -2319,7 +2360,15 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
* to not hold off transaction commits
*/
logical = base + offset;
-
+ physical_end = physical + nstripes * map->stripe_len;
+ if (map->type & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 |
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID6)) {
+ get_raid56_logic_offset(physical_end, num,
+ map, &logic_end);
+ logic_end += base;
+ } else {
+ logic_end = logical + increment * nstripes;
+ }
wait_event(sctx->list_wait,
atomic_read(&sctx->bios_in_flight) == 0);
scrub_blocked_if_needed(fs_info);
@@ -2328,7 +2377,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
key_start.objectid = logical;
key_start.type = BTRFS_EXTENT_ITEM_KEY;
key_start.offset = (u64)0;
- key_end.objectid = base + offset + nstripes * increment;
+ key_end.objectid = logic_end;
key_end.type = BTRFS_METADATA_ITEM_KEY;
key_end.offset = (u64)-1;
reada1 = btrfs_reada_add(root, &key_start, &key_end);
@@ -2338,7 +2387,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
key_start.offset = logical;
key_end.objectid = BTRFS_EXTENT_CSUM_OBJECTID;
key_end.type = BTRFS_EXTENT_CSUM_KEY;
- key_end.offset = base + offset + nstripes * increment;
+ key_end.offset = logic_end;
reada2 = btrfs_reada_add(csum_root, &key_start, &key_end);
if (!IS_ERR(reada1))
@@ -2356,11 +2405,17 @@ static noinline_for_stack int scrub_stripe(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
/*
* now find all extents for each stripe and scrub them
*/
- logical = base + offset;
- physical = map->stripes[num].physical;
- logic_end = logical + increment * nstripes;
ret = 0;
- while (logical < logic_end) {
+ while (physical < physical_end) {
+ /* for raid56, we skip parity stripe */
+ if (map->type & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 |
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID6)) {
+ ret = get_raid56_logic_offset(physical, num,
+ map, &logical);
+ logical += base;
+ if (ret)
+ goto skip;
+ }
/*
* canceled?
*/
@@ -2504,15 +2559,29 @@ again:
scrub_free_csums(sctx);
if (extent_logical + extent_len <
key.objectid + bytes) {
- logical += increment;
- physical += map->stripe_len;
-
+ if (map->type & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 |
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID6)) {
+ /*
+ * loop until we find next data stripe
+ * or we have finished all stripes.
+ */
+ do {
+ physical += map->stripe_len;
+ ret = get_raid56_logic_offset(
+ physical, num,
+ map, &logical);
+ logical += base;
+ } while (physical < physical_end && ret);
+ } else {
+ physical += map->stripe_len;
+ logical += increment;
+ }
if (logical < key.objectid + bytes) {
cond_resched();
goto again;
}
- if (logical >= logic_end) {
+ if (physical >= physical_end) {
stop_loop = 1;
break;
}
@@ -2521,6 +2590,7 @@ next:
path->slots[0]++;
}
btrfs_release_path(path);
+skip:
logical += increment;
physical += map->stripe_len;
spin_lock(&sctx->stat_lock);
--
1.9.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] Btrfs: scrub raid56 stripes in the right way
2014-04-08 11:18 [PATCH v4 2/2] Btrfs: scrub raid56 stripes in the right way Wang Shilong
@ 2014-04-10 23:36 ` Chris Mason
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Chris Mason @ 2014-04-10 23:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wang Shilong, linux-btrfs; +Cc: fengguang.wu, kbuild-all
On 04/08/2014 07:18 AM, Wang Shilong wrote:
> Steps to reproduce:
> # mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sda[8-11] -m raid5 -d raid5
> # mount /dev/sda8 /mnt
> # btrfs scrub start -BR /mnt
> # echo $? <--unverified errors make return value be 3
>
> This is because we don't setup right mapping between physical
> and logical address for raid56, which makes checksum mismatch.
> But we will find everthing is fine later when rechecking using
> btrfs_map_block().
>
> This patch fixed the problem by settuping right mappings and
> we only verify data stripes' checksums.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> v3->v4: fix compile warnings on avr32 platform.(reported by 0-day LKP)
Can you please send this as an incremental? I'd rather not rebase the
integration branch right now.
Thanks!
-chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-04-10 23:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-04-08 11:18 [PATCH v4 2/2] Btrfs: scrub raid56 stripes in the right way Wang Shilong
2014-04-10 23:36 ` Chris Mason
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).