From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/9] xfs: skip verification on initial "guess" superblock read
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 17:52:21 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1392767549-25574-2-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1392767549-25574-1-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com>
When xfs_readsb() does the very first read of the superblock,
it makes a guess at the length of the buffer, based on the
sector size of the underlying storage. This may or may
not match the filesystem sector size in sb_sectsize, so
we can't i.e. do a CRC check on it; it might be too short.
In fact, mounting a filesystem with sb_sectsize larger
than the device sector size will cause a mount failure
if CRCs are enabled, because we are checksumming a length
which exceeds the buffer passed to it.
So always read twice; the first time we read with NULL
buffer ops to skip verification; then set the proper
read length, hook up the proper verifier, and give it
another go.
Once we are sure that we've got the right buffer length,
we can also use bp->b_length in the xfs_sb_read_verify,
rather than the less-trusted on-disk sectorsize for
secondary superblocks. Before this we ran the risk of
passing junk to the crc32c routines, which didn't always
handle extreme values.
Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
---
fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++--------
fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c | 3 +--
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c
index 02df7b4..f96c056 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c
@@ -282,22 +282,29 @@ xfs_readsb(
struct xfs_sb *sbp = &mp->m_sb;
int error;
int loud = !(flags & XFS_MFSI_QUIET);
+ const struct xfs_buf_ops *buf_ops;
ASSERT(mp->m_sb_bp == NULL);
ASSERT(mp->m_ddev_targp != NULL);
/*
+ * For the initial read, we must guess at the sector
+ * size based on the block device. It's enough to
+ * get the sb_sectsize out of the superblock and
+ * then reread with the proper length.
+ * We don't verify it yet, because it may not be complete.
+ */
+ sector_size = xfs_getsize_buftarg(mp->m_ddev_targp);
+ buf_ops = NULL;
+
+ /*
* Allocate a (locked) buffer to hold the superblock.
* This will be kept around at all times to optimize
* access to the superblock.
*/
- sector_size = xfs_getsize_buftarg(mp->m_ddev_targp);
-
reread:
bp = xfs_buf_read_uncached(mp->m_ddev_targp, XFS_SB_DADDR,
- BTOBB(sector_size), 0,
- loud ? &xfs_sb_buf_ops
- : &xfs_sb_quiet_buf_ops);
+ BTOBB(sector_size), 0, buf_ops);
if (!bp) {
if (loud)
xfs_warn(mp, "SB buffer read failed");
@@ -328,12 +335,13 @@ reread:
}
/*
- * If device sector size is smaller than the superblock size,
- * re-read the superblock so the buffer is correctly sized.
+ * Re-read the superblock so the buffer is correctly sized,
+ * and properly verified.
*/
- if (sector_size < sbp->sb_sectsize) {
+ if (buf_ops == NULL) {
xfs_buf_relse(bp);
sector_size = sbp->sb_sectsize;
+ buf_ops = loud ? &xfs_sb_buf_ops : &xfs_sb_quiet_buf_ops;
goto reread;
}
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c
index 5071ccb..359b19a 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c
@@ -611,7 +611,7 @@ xfs_sb_read_verify(
XFS_SB_VERSION_5) ||
dsb->sb_crc != 0)) {
- if (!xfs_verify_cksum(bp->b_addr, be16_to_cpu(dsb->sb_sectsize),
+ if (!xfs_verify_cksum(bp->b_addr, BBTOB(bp->b_length),
offsetof(struct xfs_sb, sb_crc))) {
/* Only fail bad secondaries on a known V5 filesystem */
if (bp->b_bn == XFS_SB_DADDR ||
@@ -644,7 +644,6 @@ xfs_sb_quiet_read_verify(
{
struct xfs_dsb *dsb = XFS_BUF_TO_SBP(bp);
-
if (dsb->sb_magicnum == cpu_to_be32(XFS_SB_MAGIC)) {
/* XFS filesystem, verify noisily! */
xfs_sb_read_verify(bp);
--
1.7.1
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-18 23:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-18 23:52 [PATCH 0/9] current series for verifier error differentiation Eric Sandeen
2014-02-18 23:52 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2014-02-19 3:36 ` [PATCH 1/9] xfs: skip verification on initial "guess" superblock read Dave Chinner
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 2/9] xfs: limit superblock corruption errors to actual corruption Eric Sandeen
2014-02-19 3:37 ` Dave Chinner
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 3/9] xfs: skip pointless CRC updates after verifier failures Eric Sandeen
2014-02-19 6:35 ` Jeff Liu
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 4/9] xfs: Use defines for CRC offsets in all cases Eric Sandeen
2014-02-19 7:56 ` Jeff Liu
2014-02-20 0:27 ` Dave Chinner
2014-02-20 9:33 ` Jeff Liu
2014-02-20 9:41 ` Jeff Liu
2014-02-27 2:15 ` Dave Chinner
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 5/9] xfs: add helper for verifying checksums on xfs_bufs Eric Sandeen
2014-02-27 4:17 ` Dave Chinner
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 6/9] xfs: add helper for updating " Eric Sandeen
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 7/9] xfs: add xfs_verifier_error() Eric Sandeen
2014-02-19 6:30 ` Dave Chinner
2014-02-20 2:58 ` [PATCH 7/9 V2] " Eric Sandeen
2014-02-27 4:20 ` Dave Chinner
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 8/9] xfs: print useful caller information in xfs_error_report Eric Sandeen
2014-02-19 12:42 ` Jeff Liu
2014-02-18 23:52 ` [PATCH 9/9] xfs: modify verifiers to differentiate CRC from other errors Eric Sandeen
2014-02-19 14:01 ` Brian Foster
2014-02-19 16:12 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-02-20 3:10 ` [PATCH 9/9 V2] " Eric Sandeen
2014-02-20 13:10 ` Brian Foster
2014-02-27 9:12 ` [PATCH 0/9] current series for verifier error differentiation Dave Chinner
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=1392767549-25574-2-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com \
--to=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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