From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: Su Yue <suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: change logic of leaf process if repair
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:01:08 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <82116eb9-1ae0-a619-142e-79b27f44d431@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180126083519.28373-10-suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4972 bytes --]
On 2018年01月26日 16:35, Su Yue wrote:
> In lowmem check without repair, process_one_leaf_v2() will process one
> entire leaf and inner check_inode_item() leads path point next
> leaf.
> In the beginning, process_one_leaf_v2() will let path point fist inode
> item or first position where inode id changed.
>
> However, in lowmem repair, process_one_leaf_v2() will be interrupted
> to process one leaf because repair will CoW the leaf. Then some items
> unprocessed is skipped.
> Since repair may also delete some items, we can't use tricks like
> record last checked key.
>
> So, only for lowmem repair:
> 1. check_inode_item is responsible for handle case missing inode item.
I think the idea to use inode item as the indicator is a good idea.
And since only check_inode_item() can delete inode item, let it to
handle the path is reasonable.
> 2. process_one_leaf_v2() do not modify path manually, and check_inode()
> promise that @path points last checked item.
> Only when something are fixed, process_one_leaf_v2() will continue
> to check in next round.
>
> Signed-off-by: Su Yue <suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> cmds-check.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/cmds-check.c b/cmds-check.c
> index e57eea4e61c9..ae0a9e146399 100644
> --- a/cmds-check.c
> +++ b/cmds-check.c
> @@ -2007,6 +2007,8 @@ static int process_one_leaf_v2(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_path *path,
>
> cur_bytenr = cur->start;
>
> + if (repair)
> + goto again;
> /* skip to first inode item or the first inode number change */
> nritems = btrfs_header_nritems(cur);
> for (i = 0; i < nritems; i++) {
> @@ -2033,9 +2035,12 @@ again:
> goto out;
>
> /* still have inode items in thie leaf */
> - if (cur->start == cur_bytenr)
> + if (cur->start == cur_bytenr) {
> + ret = btrfs_next_item(root, path);
> + if (ret > 0)
> + goto out;
> goto again;
> -
> + }
> /*
> * we have switched to another leaf, above nodes may
> * have changed, here walk down the path, if a node
> @@ -5721,6 +5726,8 @@ static int repair_dir_item(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_key *key,
> ino);
> }
> }
> + } else {
> + true_filetype = filetype;
This modification doesn't seems related to this patch.
Maybe it's better to move it 4th patch?
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -6489,6 +6496,45 @@ out:
> return ret;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Try insert new inode item frist.
> + * If failed, jump to next inode item.
> + */
> +static int handle_inode_item_missing(struct btrfs_root *root,
> + struct btrfs_path *path)
> +{
> + struct btrfs_key key;
> + int ret;
> +
> + btrfs_item_key_to_cpu(path->nodes[0], &key, path->slots[0]);
> +
> + ret = repair_inode_item_missing(root, key.objectid, 0);
> + if (!ret) {
> + btrfs_release_path(path);
> + ret = btrfs_search_slot(NULL, root, &key, path, 0, 0);
> + if (ret)
> + goto next_inode;
> + else
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> +next_inode:
> + error("inode item[%llu] is missing, skip to check next inode",
> + key.objectid);
> + while (1) {
> + ret = btrfs_next_item(root, path);
> + if (ret > 0)
> + goto out;
ret < 0 case is not handled.
> + btrfs_item_key_to_cpu(path->nodes[0], &key, path->slots[0]);
> + if (key.type == BTRFS_INODE_ITEM_KEY) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +out:
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Check INODE_ITEM and related ITEMs (the same inode number)
> * 1. check link count
> @@ -6536,6 +6582,13 @@ static int check_inode_item(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_path *path,
> err |= LAST_ITEM;
> return err;
> }
> + if (key.type != BTRFS_INODE_ITEM_KEY && repair) {
> + ret = handle_inode_item_missing(root, path);
> + if (ret > 0)
> + err |= LAST_ITEM;
> + if (ret)
> + return err;
> + }
>
> ii = btrfs_item_ptr(node, slot, struct btrfs_inode_item);
> isize = btrfs_inode_size(node, ii);
> @@ -6561,7 +6614,6 @@ static int check_inode_item(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_path *path,
> btrfs_item_key_to_cpu(node, &key, slot);
> if (key.objectid != inode_id)
> goto out;
> -
> switch (key.type) {
> case BTRFS_INODE_REF_KEY:
> ret = check_inode_ref(root, &key, path, namebuf,
> @@ -6608,12 +6660,10 @@ static int check_inode_item(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_path *path,
> }
>
> out:
> - if (err & LAST_ITEM) {
> - btrfs_release_path(path);
> - ret = btrfs_search_slot(NULL, root, &last_key, path, 0, 0);
> - if (ret)
> - return err;
> - }
> + btrfs_release_path(path);
> + ret = btrfs_search_slot(NULL, root, &last_key, path, 0, 0);
> + if (ret)
> + return err;
Why the LAST_ITEM bit is ignored now?
Thanks,
Qu
>
> /* verify INODE_ITEM nlink/isize/nbytes */
> if (dir) {
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 520 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-26 10:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-26 8:35 [PATCH 00/15] btrfs-progs: fix filetype mismatch in check Su Yue
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 01/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: introduce repair_inode_item_mismatch() Su Yue
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 02/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: find and guess inode filetype Su Yue
2018-01-26 8:49 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 9:14 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 9:21 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 9:31 ` Su Yue
2018-01-26 9:35 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 03/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: find filetype in repair_inode_missing() Su Yue
2018-01-26 9:22 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 04/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: repair complex cases in repair_dir_item() Su Yue
2018-01-26 9:33 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 05/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: let check_dir_item() continue if find wrong inode_item Su Yue
2018-01-26 9:36 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 06/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: let check_dir_item() return if repaired Su Yue
2018-01-26 9:43 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 07/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: find_dir_item by di_key in check_dir_item() Su Yue
2018-01-26 9:37 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 08/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: call get_dir_isize() after repair Su Yue
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 09/15] btrfs-progs: lowmem check: change logic of leaf process if repair Su Yue
2018-01-26 10:01 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2018-01-26 10:15 ` Su Yue
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 10/15] btrfs-progs: check: clear I_ERR_FILE_EXTENT_DISCOUNT after repair Su Yue
2018-01-26 10:02 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 11/15] btrfs-progs: check: modify indoe_rec and backref " Su Yue
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 12/15] btrfs-progs: check: increase counter error in check_inode_recs() Su Yue
2018-01-26 10:05 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 13/15] btrfs-progs: check: find inode filetype in create_inode_item() Su Yue
2018-01-26 10:11 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 14/15] btrfs-progs: check: handle mismatched filetype in repair_inode_backref Su Yue
2018-01-26 8:35 ` [PATCH 15/15] btrfs-progs: fsck-tests: add image for original and lowmem check Su Yue
2018-01-26 10:17 ` Qu Wenruo
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=82116eb9-1ae0-a619-142e-79b27f44d431@gmx.com \
--to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.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).