linux-xfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] repair: ensure prefetched buffers have CRCs validated
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 07:46:42 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140415214642.GN15995@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140415194000.GB3470@laptop.bfoster>

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 03:40:00PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 06:24:55PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Prefetch currently does not do CRC validation when the IO completes
> > due to the optimisation it performs and the fact that it does not
> > know what the type of metadata into the buffer is supposed to be.
> > Hence, mark all prefetched buffers as "suspect" so that when the
> > end user tries to read it with a supplied validation function the
> > validation is run even though the buffer was already in the cache.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  include/libxfs.h  |  1 +
> >  libxfs/rdwr.c     | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >  repair/prefetch.c |  3 +++
> >  3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/libxfs.h b/include/libxfs.h
> > index 6bc6c94..6b1e276 100644
> > --- a/include/libxfs.h
> > +++ b/include/libxfs.h
> > @@ -333,6 +333,7 @@ enum xfs_buf_flags_t {	/* b_flags bits */
> >  	LIBXFS_B_STALE		= 0x0004,	/* buffer marked as invalid */
> >  	LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE	= 0x0008,	/* buffer is sync'd to disk */
> >  	LIBXFS_B_DISCONTIG	= 0x0010,	/* discontiguous buffer */
> > +	LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED	= 0x0020,	/* needs verification */
> 
> This is used in the first couple patches, so it should probably be
> defined earlier (or shuffle those patches appropriately).

Ah, I busted that on shuffling the patchset, and hadn't done a
patch-by-patch compile. Well spotted!

> 
> >  };
> >  
> >  #define XFS_BUF_DADDR_NULL		((xfs_daddr_t) (-1LL))
> > diff --git a/libxfs/rdwr.c b/libxfs/rdwr.c
> > index 7208a2f..a8f06aa 100644
> > --- a/libxfs/rdwr.c
> > +++ b/libxfs/rdwr.c
> > @@ -718,12 +718,25 @@ libxfs_readbuf(struct xfs_buftarg *btp, xfs_daddr_t blkno, int len, int flags,
> >  	bp = libxfs_getbuf(btp, blkno, len);
> >  	if (!bp)
> >  		return NULL;
> > -	if ((bp->b_flags & (LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE|LIBXFS_B_DIRTY)))
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * if the buffer was prefetched, it is likely that it was not
> > +	 * validated. Hence if we are supplied an ops function and the
> > +	 * buffer is marked as unchecked, we need to validate it now.
> > +	 */
> > +	if ((bp->b_flags & (LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE|LIBXFS_B_DIRTY))) {
> > +		if (ops && (bp->b_flags & LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED)) {
> > +			bp->b_error = 0;
> > +			bp->b_ops = ops;
> > +			bp->b_ops->verify_read(bp);
> > +			bp->b_flags &= ~LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED;
> 
> Should we always expect an unchecked buffer to be read with an ops
> vector before being written? Even if so, this might look cleaner if we
> didn't encode the possibility of running a read verifier on a dirty
> buffer. I presume that would always fail as the crc is updated in the
> write verifier.

It should fail, and that's a good thing because writing to an
unchecked buffer would indicate that we didn't validate it properly
in the first place. Hence I thought that doing it this way leaves
a canary that traps other problem usage with unchecked buffers.

Realistically, we shouldn't be writing unchecked buffers - prefetch
doesn't touch buffers, it just does IO, and so someone else has to
read the buffers before they can be dirtied. If it's read without an
ops structure then modified and read again with an ops structure,
we'll catch it...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-15 21:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-15  8:24 [PATCH 0/9] xfs_db, xfs_repair: improve CRC error detection Dave Chinner
2014-04-15  8:24 ` [PATCH 1/9] db: don't claim unchecked CRCs are correct Dave Chinner
2014-04-21  7:00   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-21 23:13     ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-15  8:24 ` [PATCH 2/9] db: verify buffer on type change Dave Chinner
2014-04-21  7:02   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-21 23:14     ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-15  8:24 ` [PATCH 3/9] repair: ensure prefetched buffers have CRCs validated Dave Chinner
2014-04-15 19:40   ` Brian Foster
2014-04-15 21:46     ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2014-04-15 22:06       ` Brian Foster
2014-04-16  0:41         ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-15  8:24 ` [PATCH 4/9] repair: detect and correct CRC errors in directory blocks Dave Chinner
2014-04-21  7:08   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-15  8:24 ` [PATCH 5/9] repair: detect CRC errors in AG headers Dave Chinner
2014-04-15 19:40   ` Brian Foster
2014-04-15 21:52     ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-21  7:11   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-21 23:35     ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-22  6:47       ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-22  9:10         ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-22  9:41           ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-15  8:24 ` [PATCH 6/9] repair: report AG btree verifier errors Dave Chinner
2014-04-15 19:40   ` Brian Foster
2014-04-15 21:53     ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-15  8:24 ` [PATCH 7/9] repair: remove more dirv1 leftovers Dave Chinner
2014-04-16 13:23   ` Brian Foster
2014-04-21  7:14     ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-21  7:13   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-15  8:25 ` [PATCH 8/9] repair: handle remote sylmlink CRC errors Dave Chinner
2014-04-16 13:23   ` Brian Foster
2014-04-15  8:25 ` [PATCH 9/9] repair: detect and handle attribute tree " Dave Chinner
2014-04-16 13:25   ` Brian Foster
2014-04-21 23:27     ` Dave Chinner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-04-24  5:01 [PATCH 0/9 V2] xfs_db, xfs_repair: improve CRC error detection Dave Chinner
2014-04-24  5:01 ` [PATCH 3/9] repair: ensure prefetched buffers have CRCs validated Dave Chinner
2014-04-25  5:47   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-28 21:04 [PATCH 0/9 v3] xfs_db, xfs_repair: improve CRC error detection Dave Chinner
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 3/9] repair: ensure prefetched buffers have CRCs validated Dave Chinner
2014-04-29 14:05   ` Brian Foster
2014-04-29 18:15   ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20140415214642.GN15995@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=bfoster@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).