[RFC PATCH] f2fs: do not set LOST_PINO for created/renamed dir

[RFC PATCH] f2fs: do not set LOST_PINO for created/renamed dir

[Sheng Yong]

Since directories will be written back with checkpoint and fsync a
directory will always write CP, there is no need to set LOST_PINO
after creating or renaming a directory. During rename, fix dir's
p_ino directly. Otherwise, fsck will find out that the pino does
not match. The scenario can be reproduced as the following:

	$ mkdir /bar/subbar /foo
	$ rename /bar/subbar /foo

Then fsck will report:
[ASSERT] (__chk_dots_dentries:1182)  --> Bad inode number[0x3] for '..', parent parent ino is [0x4]

Signed-off-by: Sheng Yong <shengyong1@huawei.com>
---
 fs/f2fs/dir.c   | 3 ++-
 fs/f2fs/namei.c | 5 ++++-
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/dir.c b/fs/f2fs/dir.c
index 94756f55a97e..37f9c7f55605 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/dir.c
@@ -415,7 +415,8 @@ struct page *init_inode_metadata(struct inode *inode, struct inode *dir,
 	 * We lost i_pino from now on.
 	 */
 	if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_INC_LINK)) {
-		file_lost_pino(inode);
+		if (!S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
+			file_lost_pino(inode);
 		/*
 		 * If link the tmpfile to alias through linkat path,
 		 * we should remove this inode from orphan list.
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
index c31b40e5f9cf..b75dc2f4ad57 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
@@ -772,7 +772,10 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry,
 	}
 
 	down_write(&F2FS_I(old_inode)->i_sem);
-	file_lost_pino(old_inode);
+	if (!old_dir_entry || whiteout)
+		file_lost_pino(old_inode);
+	else
+		F2FS_I(old_inode)->i_pino = new_dir->i_ino;
 	up_write(&F2FS_I(old_inode)->i_sem);
 
 	old_inode->i_ctime = current_time(old_inode);
-- 
2.13.0


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot

Re: [RFC PATCH] f2fs: do not set LOST_PINO for created/renamed dir

[Chao Yu]

Hi Sheng Yong,

On 2017/6/22 14:47, Sheng Yong wrote:
> Since directories will be written back with checkpoint and fsync a
> directory will always write CP, there is no need to set LOST_PINO

Could you make another patch to fix unneeded flag setting in directory?

Thanks,

> after creating or renaming a directory. During rename, fix dir's
> p_ino directly. Otherwise, fsck will find out that the pino does
> not match. The scenario can be reproduced as the following:
> 
> 	$ mkdir /bar/subbar /foo
> 	$ rename /bar/subbar /foo
> 
> Then fsck will report:
> [ASSERT] (__chk_dots_dentries:1182)  --> Bad inode number[0x3] for '..', parent parent ino is [0x4]>
> Signed-off-by: Sheng Yong <shengyong1@huawei.com>
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/dir.c   | 3 ++-
>  fs/f2fs/namei.c | 5 ++++-
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/dir.c b/fs/f2fs/dir.c
> index 94756f55a97e..37f9c7f55605 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/dir.c
> @@ -415,7 +415,8 @@ struct page *init_inode_metadata(struct inode *inode, struct inode *dir,
>  	 * We lost i_pino from now on.
>  	 */
>  	if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_INC_LINK)) {
> -		file_lost_pino(inode);
> +		if (!S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
> +			file_lost_pino(inode);
>  		/*
>  		 * If link the tmpfile to alias through linkat path,
>  		 * we should remove this inode from orphan list.
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> index c31b40e5f9cf..b75dc2f4ad57 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> @@ -772,7 +772,10 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry,
>  	}
>  
>  	down_write(&F2FS_I(old_inode)->i_sem);
> -	file_lost_pino(old_inode);
> +	if (!old_dir_entry || whiteout)
> +		file_lost_pino(old_inode);
> +	else
> +		F2FS_I(old_inode)->i_pino = new_dir->i_ino;
>  	up_write(&F2FS_I(old_inode)->i_sem);
>  
>  	old_inode->i_ctime = current_time(old_inode);
> 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot