Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: inode unlinked list needs to recalculate the inode CRC

Dave Chinner
2013-05-30T20:27:22Z

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:17:47AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> On 05/28/2013 04:36 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> >
> > The inode unlinked list manipulations operate directly on the inode
> > buffer, and so bypass the inode CRC calculation mechanisms. Hence an
> > inode on the unlinked list has an invalid CRC. Fix this by
> > recalculating the CRC whenever we modify an unlinked list pointer in
> > an inode, ncluding during log recovery. This is trivial to do and
> > results in unlinked list operations always leaving a consistent
> > inode in the buffer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c | 9 +++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > index efbe1ac..2d993e7 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > @@ -1579,6 +1579,23 @@ out_bmap_cancel:
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > + * Helper function to calculate range of the inode to log and recalculate the
> > + * on-disk inode crc if necessary.
> > + */
> > +static int
> > +xfs_iunlink_dinode_calc_crc(
> > + struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > + struct xfs_dinode *dip)
> > +{
> > + if (dip->di_version < 3)
> > + return sizeof(xfs_agino_t);
> > +
> > + xfs_dinode_calc_crc(mp, dip);
> > + return offsetof(struct xfs_dinode, di_changecount) -
> > + offsetof(struct xfs_dinode, di_next_unlinked);
> > +}
> > +
>
> So we've added a new helper, the return value for which is either the
> size of an inode number or an inode number + crc, depending on format. I
> also notice that the return value doesn't appear to be used anywhere
> this helper is called.

Because I forgot to remove it. ;)

>
> > +/*
> > * This is called when the inode's link count goes to 0.
> > * We place the on-disk inode on a list in the AGI. It
> > * will be pulled from this list when the inode is freed.
> > @@ -1638,10 +1655,15 @@ xfs_iunlink(
> > dip->di_next_unlinked = agi->agi_unlinked[bucket_index];
> > offset = ip->i_imap.im_boffset +
> > offsetof(xfs_dinode_t, di_next_unlinked);
> > +
> > + /* need to recalc the inode CRC if appropriate */
> > + xfs_iunlink_dinode_calc_crc(mp, dip);
> > +
> > xfs_trans_inode_buf(tp, ibp);
> > xfs_trans_log_buf(tp, ibp, offset,
> > - (offset + sizeof(xfs_agino_t) - 1));
> > + offset + sizeof(xfs_agino_t) - 1);
> > xfs_inobp_check(mp, ibp);
> > +
> > }
>
> So IIUC, offset is set to the offset of the di_next_unlinked value of
> this inode in the backing buffer of the inode (which we've just updated
> directly via dip).
>
> We call the helper to update the CRC then call xfs_trans_log_buf() to
> log a range of the buffer. From the original code, I surmise that we're
> logging the range that represents the di_next_unlinked value and from
> the addition of the helper, I surmise we intend to now include the crc
> in that logged region.
>
> But we haven't utilized the return value and I'm speculating on the
> intent here. So I see that we're updating the CRC, but is it actually
> logged? Perhaps I'm missing something, but if so, then why even have the
> xfs_iunlink_dinode_calc_crc() helper?
>
> /me goes back to read the original 9/9 and followup:
>
> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-05/msg00867.html
>
> OK, so in that case, perhaps the helper is now unnecessary and we could
> just call xfs_dinode_calc_crc()?

Yup, exactly.

> BTW, I was also going to ask here whether the fact that we update the
> CRC on recovery rather than logging it exposed items in the log to risk
> if they happened to become corrupted before that update occurs, but
> IIUC, we're still protected in that recovery itself should validate the
> existing on-disk CRC prior to the update. Correct?

No, recovery doesn't check it yet. Recovery is a complex dance, so
there's further work there needed allow recovery to do CRC checking
on read (as the buffer initialisation migh be what is being
replayed).

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com