From: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>
To: puneeth_aditya_5656 <myakampuneeth@gmail.com>,
linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] erofs-utils: lib: fix 48bit addressing detection for chunk-based format
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 11:55:06 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <616015da-0938-44e2-9cb3-4d6bb37d8cd2@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260224191316.2294-1-myakampuneeth@gmail.com>
On 2026/2/25 03:13, puneeth_aditya_5656 wrote:
> The 48-bit chunk format flag was being set inside
> erofs_blob_write_chunked_file right after erofs_blob_getchunk returns.
> At that point chunk->blkaddr is the chunk's offset in the temporary
> blob buffer, not the final image address. The real address is only
> known after erofs_mkfs_dump_blobs applies remapped_base.
>
> This means the detection was unreliable in both directions: a chunk
> whose blob offset looks large but fits in 32-bits after remapping gets
> flagged unnecessarily, and worse, a chunk that lands above UINT32_MAX
I think the first case is impossible for the current remapping
mechanism.
> after remapping may not get flagged at all, producing a corrupt image.
>
> Fix this by introducing erofs_inode_fixup_chunkformat() which walks
> the chunk array after remapped_base is finalized and sets the 48-bit
> flag if any chunk address exceeds UINT32_MAX. The fixup is called from
> erofs_iflush so that the correct chunkformat is written into the
> on-disk inode header. Both blob chunks (remapped_base + chunk->blkaddr)
> and device chunks (chunk->blkaddr directly) are handled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Puneeth Aditya <myakampuneeth@gmail.com>
> ---
> include/erofs/blobchunk.h | 1 +
> lib/blobchunk.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> lib/inode.c | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/erofs/blobchunk.h b/include/erofs/blobchunk.h
> index ef06773..48fca63 100644
> --- a/include/erofs/blobchunk.h
> +++ b/include/erofs/blobchunk.h
> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ extern "C"
>
> struct erofs_blobchunk *erofs_get_unhashed_chunk(unsigned int device_id,
> erofs_blk_t blkaddr, erofs_off_t sourceoffset);
> +void erofs_inode_fixup_chunkformat(struct erofs_inode *inode);
> int erofs_write_chunk_indexes(struct erofs_inode *inode, struct erofs_vfile *vf,
> erofs_off_t off);
> int erofs_blob_write_chunked_file(struct erofs_inode *inode, int fd,
> diff --git a/lib/blobchunk.c b/lib/blobchunk.c
> index a051904..96c161b 100644
> --- a/lib/blobchunk.c
> +++ b/lib/blobchunk.c
> @@ -136,6 +136,42 @@ static int erofs_blob_hashmap_cmp(const void *a, const void *b,
> sizeof(ec1->sha256));
> }
>
...
> +
> int erofs_write_chunk_indexes(struct erofs_inode *inode, struct erofs_vfile *vf,
> erofs_off_t off)
> {
> @@ -380,10 +416,6 @@ int erofs_blob_write_chunked_file(struct erofs_inode *inode, int fd,
> goto err;
> }
>
> - /* FIXME! `chunk->blkaddr` is not the final blkaddr here */
> - if (chunk->blkaddr != EROFS_NULL_ADDR &&
> - chunk->blkaddr >= UINT32_MAX)
> - inode->u.chunkformat |= EROFS_CHUNK_FORMAT_48BIT;
> if (!erofs_blob_can_merge(sbi, lastch, chunk)) {
> erofs_update_minextblks(sbi, interval_start, pos,
> &minextblks);
> diff --git a/lib/inode.c b/lib/inode.c
> index 4a214f9..25087ca 100644
> --- a/lib/inode.c
> +++ b/lib/inode.c
> @@ -794,6 +794,8 @@ int erofs_iflush(struct erofs_inode *inode)
> } else if (is_inode_layout_compression(inode)) {
> u1.blocks_lo = cpu_to_le32(inode->u.i_blocks);
> } else if (inode->datalayout == EROFS_INODE_CHUNK_BASED) {
> + if (inode->chunkindexes)
It's a useless check, just remove this.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-25 3:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-24 5:57 [PATCH] blobchunk: fix 48-bit format detection to use final remapped block addresses puneeth_aditya_5656
2026-02-24 6:44 ` Gao Xiang
2026-02-24 16:37 ` [PATCH v2] erofs-utils: lib: fix 48bit addressing detection for chunk-based format puneeth_aditya_5656
2026-02-24 17:44 ` Gao Xiang
2026-02-24 19:10 ` puneeth_aditya_5656
2026-02-24 19:13 ` [PATCH v3] " puneeth_aditya_5656
2026-02-25 3:55 ` Gao Xiang [this message]
2026-02-25 7:39 ` [PATCH v4] " puneeth_aditya_5656
2026-02-25 8:19 ` Gao Xiang
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=616015da-0938-44e2-9cb3-4d6bb37d8cd2@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=myakampuneeth@gmail.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