From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB4D9C5B57D for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2019 02:17:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 684F821670; Sat, 6 Jul 2019 02:17:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="HOchLwTX"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="X3oSyCzx"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WSshJAZ0" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 684F821670 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hjaGc-0005wH-VD; Sat, 06 Jul 2019 02:17:34 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hjaGa-0005vy-V6 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 06 Jul 2019 02:17:32 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:References:Cc:To:From:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=L2mMFTR0jSupbPnHxu3LYp80QOOSLvLf62nhjx7S7N4=; b=HOchLwTXn+j0EM1dGVs3FsOlst TvhMvZnJ83WVOJSS/VLhWHN1S8waHrJAwqCtac3/yqGRGZSDwGHWn/qlNREuG76ZRuQvRI+//vWjG RFXckRPG86TN5jQ0URmmQbgaXPGuvV3r7itbfF90O8o6bHHm/0uuMuzoFADP5/jvHuJA=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:References:Cc:To:From:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=L2mMFTR0jSupbPnHxu3LYp80QOOSLvLf62nhjx7S7N4=; b=X3oSyCzx/OcpshFfSNOvGb6CPj nVyqUb89kFfd1zzi6AtEEZJfUFac8P76yhWZRCoCav9LTPGkdVHjzuvZL1mAw6YoR15D7sskLz8iy 8trmTpWN+odfOx3kMnBdKSTHVMmKofewQoxu2QCLaMJ+be0XeBKP1ilqn/U/0bWhJfSA=; Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by sfi-mx-4.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) id 1hjaGl-0095uq-M2 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 06 Jul 2019 02:17:45 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.101] (unknown [49.65.245.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2205C21670; Sat, 6 Jul 2019 02:17:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1562379458; bh=2+XWnWhVJLAELdHLxZ7G038nXM754BDVXadysx6ilGU=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=WSshJAZ0KO2xsHKcOOrwErkbHWN9I+ICAbUM5U2tbcTap1+Oaanopy84K74J7QauA zGg2PKizAU28eUCJJ5kWmKTZV+onvvQNJmivTfzk6Atqetp7CHFvSlUZs4U2L4ymiQ 4JUoyDahK0wa1xjzMAgdnWscNy7EUpmQADMYczks= From: Chao Yu To: Sahitya Tummala References: <1562302863-14418-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> <15bb7741-7c2f-8dc2-065f-ba1fcaf22050@huawei.com> <20190705110356.GC8289@codeaurora.org> <20190705134859.GD8289@codeaurora.org> <0143261e-5592-1ee2-e09d-437d2a7eac22@kernel.org> <20190706013112.GE8289@codeaurora.org> <20190706013729.GF8289@codeaurora.org> <5932c199-1ee0-750a-0b25-25e237d95c9b@kernel.org> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2019 10:17:27 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5932c199-1ee0-750a-0b25-25e237d95c9b@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Headers-End: 1hjaGl-0095uq-M2 Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] fsck: Fix data loss issue observed during SPO X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Jaegeuk Kim , linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 2019-7-6 10:10, Chao Yu wrote: > Hi Sahitya, > > On 2019-7-6 9:37, Sahitya Tummala wrote: >> Hi Chao, >> >> I just realized that there is a patch from you to fix this already. >> >> commit 92ea71c711681a8f575d09d57d5ceaebd6644fcc >> Author: Chao Yu >> Date: Wed Jan 9 10:48:25 2019 +0800 >> >> fsck.f2fs: fix incorrect boundary of IS_VALID_NID() >> >> nid should never equal to max_nid, fix it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu >> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim >> >> In my code base, I was not having this patch but only have >> "fsck.f2fs: check validity of nat journal", thus resulting into >> data loss issues. I will now verify with this patch included. > > Ah, that should be the root cause.. > > BTW, the diff was pointed out by Jaegeuk on patch ("fsck.f2fs: check validity of > nat journal"), but it looks it was merged to the wrong patch. :P Sorry about that, I didn't check it out on upstream branch. Thanks, > > static inline bool IS_VALID_BLK_ADDR(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, u32 addr) > { > + if (addr == NULL_ADDR || addr == NEW_ADDR) > + return 1; > + > if (addr >= le64_to_cpu(F2FS_RAW_SUPER(sbi)->block_count) || > addr < SM_I(sbi)->main_blkaddr) { > DBG(1, "block addr [0x%x]\n", addr); > > Thanks, > >> >> Thanks for your support on this issue. >> >> Thanks, >> Sahitya. >> >> On Sat, Jul 06, 2019 at 07:01:12AM +0530, Sahitya Tummala wrote: >>> Hi Chao, >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 06, 2019 at 09:14:59AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> Hi Sahitya, >>>> >>>> On 2019-7-5 21:48, Sahitya Tummala wrote: >>>>> Hi Chao, >>>>> >>>>> The journal doesn't look to be corrupted, but only block_addr >>>>> in f2fs_nat_entry is 0 whereas nid and version seems to be valid. >>>>> These could be just truncated nodes, right? >>>> >>>> Yes, but that should not fail the condition of journal check and result in >>>> journal size truncation, right? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, the patch fails for this condition as well and results into >>> truncation of journal, due to this check addr < SM_I(sbi)->main_blkaddr >>> in IS_VALID_BLK_ADDR(). >>> >>> Do you think we can correct it this way? >>> >>> diff --git a/fsck/f2fs.h b/fsck/f2fs.h >>> index 417ca0b..00fb740 100644 >>> --- a/fsck/f2fs.h >>> +++ b/fsck/f2fs.h >>> @@ -364,8 +364,8 @@ static inline bool IS_VALID_NID(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, u32 nid) >>> >>> static inline bool IS_VALID_BLK_ADDR(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, u32 addr) >>> { >>> - if (addr >= le64_to_cpu(F2FS_RAW_SUPER(sbi)->block_count) || >>> - addr < SM_I(sbi)->main_blkaddr) { >>> + if (addr && (addr >= le64_to_cpu(F2FS_RAW_SUPER(sbi)->block_count) || >>> + addr < SM_I(sbi)->main_blkaddr)) { >>> DBG(1, "block addr [0x%x]\n", addr); >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here is the full dump of nat journal entries after a SPO (this is not a >>>>> issue case, but just a normal case with SPO) - >>>>> >>>>> [ 21.121325] fsck.f2fs: 0: addr 0 nid 5c5a ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.127509] fsck.f2fs: 1: addr 0 nid 4c1d ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.133760] fsck.f2fs: 2: addr 12075 nid 444f ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.140325] fsck.f2fs: 3: addr 0 nid 4307 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.146510] fsck.f2fs: 4: addr 0 nid 4059 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.152745] fsck.f2fs: 5: addr 0 nid 3e69 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.158944] fsck.f2fs: 6: addr 0 nid 3cf9 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.165128] fsck.f2fs: 7: addr 0 nid 3b7b ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.171362] fsck.f2fs: 8: addr 18f65 nid 34e2 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.177903] fsck.f2fs: 9: addr 12126 nid 2c87 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.184466] fsck.f2fs: 10: addr 0 nid 2a0a ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.190795] fsck.f2fs: 11: addr 0 nid 2565 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.197070] fsck.f2fs: 12: addr 0 nid 1f48 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.203369] fsck.f2fs: 13: addr 155bf nid 1d76 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.210042] fsck.f2fs: 14: addr 19538 nid 18da ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.216675] fsck.f2fs: 15: addr 0 nid 157f ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.223037] fsck.f2fs: 16: addr d117 nid ac3 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.229547] fsck.f2fs: 17: addr 11e48 nid 805 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.236088] fsck.f2fs: 18: addr d112 nid 61c ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.242585] fsck.f2fs: 19: addr d00b nid 45b ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.249086] fsck.f2fs: 20: addr d111 nid 30d ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.255544] fsck.f2fs: 21: addr d110 nid 1b5 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.262025] fsck.f2fs: 22: addr 0 nid 5e41 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.268342] fsck.f2fs: 23: addr 0 nid 5e46 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.274618] fsck.f2fs: 24: addr 0 nid 5a34 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.280916] fsck.f2fs: 25: addr 0 nid 59fa ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.287192] fsck.f2fs: 26: addr 0 nid 57c3 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.293526] fsck.f2fs: 27: addr 0 nid 5776 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.299816] fsck.f2fs: 28: addr 0 nid 4f20 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.306091] fsck.f2fs: 29: addr 0 nid 4ff7 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.312416] fsck.f2fs: 30: addr 0 nid 47e1 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.318715] fsck.f2fs: 31: addr 0 nid 4880 ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.324990] fsck.f2fs: 32: addr d118 nid ff4 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.331498] fsck.f2fs: 33: addr d10c nid ff9 ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.337957] fsck.f2fs: 34: addr 0 nid 49ed ver 1\x0a >>>>> [ 21.344290] fsck.f2fs: 35: addr 0 nid 497e ver 0\x0a >>>>> [ 21.350612] fsck.f2fs: 36: addr fc5a nid 49d2 ver 0\x0a >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 04:33:57PM +0530, Sahitya Tummala wrote: >>>>>> Hi Chao, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 06:11:47PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Sahitya, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2019/7/5 13:01, Sahitya Tummala wrote: >>>>>>>> With the commit <979b25727800> ("fsck.f2fs: check validity of nat journal"), >>>>>>>> there is a serious data loss issue observed during sudden power off tests. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In that patch, since journal's data is untrusty, I just truncated n_nats to last >>>>>>> valid one to fix original reported issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> The original issue will be fixed even without updating/truncating the n_nats >>>>>> as we still have sanity checks on nid and blkaddr, right? >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Actually, the problem here is we don't know which data is correct and which data >>>>>>> is corrupted in nat or sit journal, so even we skip broken entry without >>>>>>> modifying journal->n_{nats,sits}, latter entry may still contain broken data(but >>>>>>> it may pass validation check), and those entries may cause potential data >>>>>>> loss/corruption... >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This issue was reported by a customer in the following test scenario - >>>>>> >>>>>> Update the password in Android and then force crash. It is verified that >>>>>> all the files related to password data has fsync() already. >>>>>> >>>>>> After some iterations (3-4) of this test, it is found password related files are >>>>>> lost, failing the phone to bootup. >>>>>> >>>>>> Without this patch ("fsck.f2fs: check validity of nat journal"), they don't see >>>>>> such issue. It means that the data present in journal seems to be valid atleast >>>>>> in this case and truncating is causing to loose the valid data/files. >>>>>> >>>>>>> It looks no matter how we change the codes, we still may face data >>>>>>> loos/corruption issues. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, maybe in some cases, the data loss is still expected, but there are >>>>>> chances that data may be valid as well, which is confirmed by the test case above. >>>>>> >>>>>>> IMO, we need to find out the root cause of data corruption, So my question is >>>>>>> that why sudden power off tests can make nat journal being corrupted? I doubt >>>>>>> that in-place update method on checkpoint area of fsck may cause this... any >>>>>>> other thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In case of sudden power off, I have printed the all the journal entries in the >>>>>> NAT and I several entries with valid blkaddr and nid as below - >>>>>> >>>>>> [ 21.007649] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 0: addr 1c373 nid 45b\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.014399] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 1: addr 1c2c1 nid 1b5\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.021151] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 2/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.030860] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 3: addr 1c1f7 nid 19b2\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.037674] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 4/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.047353] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 5/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.057062] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 6: addr 1c377 nid ac3\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.063841] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 7: addr 1c378 nid ac9\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.070634] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 8: addr 1b2fe nid 807\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.077356] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 9: addr 17aeb nid 805\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.084102] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 10/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.093891] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 11/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.103662] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 12/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.113450] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 13/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.123227] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 14/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.133022] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 15/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.142792] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 16/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.152580] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 17: addr 1c37f nid ff4\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.159415] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 18: addr 1c36c nid ff9\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.166229] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 19/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.176039] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 20/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.185831] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 21/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.195631] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 22/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.205394] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 23: addr 1c2f3 nid 61c\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.212257] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 24: addr 1c391 nid 641\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.219093] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 25: addr 1c386 nid 33b\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.225905] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 26: addr 1c356 nid 258\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.232767] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 27: addr 1c2f2 nid 382\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.239601] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 28/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.249398] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 29/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.259160] fsck.f2fs: \x09Error: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(0) i/nats 30/37 is invalid!!!\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.268970] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 31: addr 1ac03 nid 1ccd\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.275874] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 32: addr 1c395 nid a57\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.282709] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 33: addr 1c392 nid 92e\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.289564] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 34: addr 1c38b nid aa1\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.296377] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 35: addr 1c393 nid 931\x0a >>>>>> [ 21.303240] fsck.f2fs: withfix: 36: addr 1c394 nid a35\x0a >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The reason is due to incorrect update of journal->n_nats in that patch. >>>>>>>> When fsck encounters a nat journal entry with invalid blkaddr/nid, it >>>>>>>> updates journal->n_nats with the index of such first entry and then continues >>>>>>>> the for loop which scans all nats in journal in f2fs_init_nid_bitmap(). >>>>>>>> But that loop doesn't continue and doesn't update nm_i->nid_bitmap as well, >>>>>>>> as it fails the for loop condition i < nats_in_cursum(journal). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There could be several other valid entries in the journal after this >>>>>>>> invalid entry. Due to this invalid journal->n_nats, build_nat_area_bitmap() >>>>>>>> could not be build properly for valid nat journal entries. It further results >>>>>>>> into these fsck asserts/errors and causes data loss due to incorrect fsck fix. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [ASSERT] (sanity_check_nid: 372) --> nid[0xfb01] ino is 0\x0a >>>>>>>> [FIX] (__chk_dentries:1438) --> Unlink [0xfb01] - _JeNcl242yB3Apz2MW,VOh6WmjsVht1W len[0x1c], type[0x1]\x0a >>>>>>>> [ASSERT] (sanity_check_nid: 372) --> nid[0xfa2d] ino is 0\x0a >>>>>>>> [FIX] (__chk_dentries:1438) --> Unlink [0xfa2d] - _++vN7axccjjGNI,TQEVmcOemY1EAAAA len[0x14], type[0x1]\x0a >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> NID[0xba5] is unreachable\x0a >>>>>>>> NID[0xfa9] is unreachable\x0a >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> [FIX] (nullify_nat_entry:2089) --> Remove nid [0xba5] in NAT\x0a >>>>>>>> [FIX] (nullify_nat_entry:2089) --> Remove nid [0xfa9] in NAT\x0a >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Fixes: 979b25727800 ("fsck.f2fs: check validity of nat journal") >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> fsck/mount.c | 2 -- >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/fsck/mount.c b/fsck/mount.c >>>>>>>> index 60e0e4a..1b93f49 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/fsck/mount.c >>>>>>>> +++ b/fsck/mount.c >>>>>>>> @@ -1160,7 +1160,6 @@ static int f2fs_init_nid_bitmap(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) >>>>>>>> addr = le32_to_cpu(nat_in_journal(journal, i).block_addr); >>>>>>>> if (!IS_VALID_BLK_ADDR(sbi, addr)) { >>>>>>>> MSG(0, "\tError: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: addr(%u) is invalid!!!\n", addr); >>>>>>>> - journal->n_nats = cpu_to_le16(i); >>>>>>>> c.fix_on = 1; >>>>>>>> continue; >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> @@ -1168,7 +1167,6 @@ static int f2fs_init_nid_bitmap(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) >>>>>>>> nid = le32_to_cpu(nid_in_journal(journal, i)); >>>>>>>> if (!IS_VALID_NID(sbi, nid)) { >>>>>>>> MSG(0, "\tError: f2fs_init_nid_bitmap: nid(%u) is invalid!!!\n", nid); >>>>>>>> - journal->n_nats = cpu_to_le16(i); >>>>>>>> c.fix_on = 1; >>>>>>>> continue; >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. >>>>>> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list >>>>>> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. >>> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list >>> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel