From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] repair: ensure prefetched buffers have CRCs validated
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:05:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140429140512.GB59046@bfoster.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1398719099-19194-4-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 07:04:53AM +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>
> ---
Looks good to me. Thanks for the comments.
Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
> include/libxfs.h | 2 ++
> libxfs/rdwr.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> repair/prefetch.c | 7 ++++---
> 3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/libxfs.h b/include/libxfs.h
> index 6b1e276..9c10957 100644
> --- a/include/libxfs.h
> +++ b/include/libxfs.h
> @@ -436,6 +436,8 @@ extern void libxfs_putbuf (xfs_buf_t *);
>
> #endif
>
> +extern void libxfs_readbuf_verify(struct xfs_buf *bp,
> + const struct xfs_buf_ops *ops);
> extern xfs_buf_t *libxfs_getsb(xfs_mount_t *, int);
> extern void libxfs_bcache_purge(void);
> extern void libxfs_bcache_flush(void);
> diff --git a/libxfs/rdwr.c b/libxfs/rdwr.c
> index 7208a2f..ea4bdfd 100644
> --- a/libxfs/rdwr.c
> +++ b/libxfs/rdwr.c
> @@ -708,6 +708,17 @@ libxfs_readbufr(struct xfs_buftarg *btp, xfs_daddr_t blkno, xfs_buf_t *bp,
> return error;
> }
>
> +void
> +libxfs_readbuf_verify(struct xfs_buf *bp, const struct xfs_buf_ops *ops)
> +{
> + if (!ops)
> + return;
> + bp->b_ops = ops;
> + bp->b_ops->verify_read(bp);
> + bp->b_flags &= ~LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED;
> +}
> +
> +
> xfs_buf_t *
> libxfs_readbuf(struct xfs_buftarg *btp, xfs_daddr_t blkno, int len, int flags,
> const struct xfs_buf_ops *ops)
> @@ -718,23 +729,38 @@ 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.
> + *
> + * We do this verification even if the buffer is dirty - the
> + * verification is almost certainly going to fail the CRC check in this
> + * case as a dirty buffer has not had the CRC recalculated. However, we
> + * should not be dirtying unchecked buffers and therefore failing it
> + * here because it's dirty and unchecked indicates we've screwed up
> + * somewhere else.
> + */
> + bp->b_error = 0;
> + if ((bp->b_flags & (LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE|LIBXFS_B_DIRTY))) {
> + if (bp->b_flags & LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED)
> + libxfs_readbuf_verify(bp, ops);
> return bp;
> + }
>
> /*
> - * only set the ops on a cache miss (i.e. first physical read) as the
> - * verifier may change the ops to match the typ eof buffer it contains.
> + * Set the ops on a cache miss (i.e. first physical read) as the
> + * verifier may change the ops to match the type of buffer it contains.
> * A cache hit might reset the verifier to the original type if we set
> * it again, but it won't get called again and set to match the buffer
> * contents. *cough* xfs_da_node_buf_ops *cough*.
> */
> - bp->b_error = 0;
> - bp->b_ops = ops;
> error = libxfs_readbufr(btp, blkno, bp, len, flags);
> if (error)
> bp->b_error = error;
> - else if (bp->b_ops)
> - bp->b_ops->verify_read(bp);
> + else
> + libxfs_readbuf_verify(bp, ops);
> return bp;
> }
>
> @@ -786,16 +812,15 @@ libxfs_readbuf_map(struct xfs_buftarg *btp, struct xfs_buf_map *map, int nmaps,
> return NULL;
>
> bp->b_error = 0;
> - bp->b_ops = ops;
> - if ((bp->b_flags & (LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE|LIBXFS_B_DIRTY)))
> + if ((bp->b_flags & (LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE|LIBXFS_B_DIRTY))) {
> + if (bp->b_flags & LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED)
> + libxfs_readbuf_verify(bp, ops);
> return bp;
> -
> - error = libxfs_readbufr_map(btp, bp, flags);
> - if (!error) {
> - bp->b_flags |= LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE;
> - if (bp->b_ops)
> - bp->b_ops->verify_read(bp);
> }
> + error = libxfs_readbufr_map(btp, bp, flags);
> + if (!error)
> + libxfs_readbuf_verify(bp, ops);
> +
> #ifdef IO_DEBUG
> printf("%lx: %s: read %lu bytes, error %d, blkno=%llu(%llu), %p\n",
> pthread_self(), __FUNCTION__, buf - (char *)bp->b_addr, error,
> @@ -888,7 +913,8 @@ libxfs_writebufr(xfs_buf_t *bp)
> #endif
> if (!error) {
> bp->b_flags |= LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE;
> - bp->b_flags &= ~(LIBXFS_B_DIRTY | LIBXFS_B_EXIT);
> + bp->b_flags &= ~(LIBXFS_B_DIRTY | LIBXFS_B_EXIT |
> + LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED);
> }
> return error;
> }
> diff --git a/repair/prefetch.c b/repair/prefetch.c
> index 6d6d344..65fedf5 100644
> --- a/repair/prefetch.c
> +++ b/repair/prefetch.c
> @@ -387,8 +387,7 @@ pf_read_inode_dirs(
> int hasdir = 0;
> int isadir;
>
> - bp->b_ops = &xfs_inode_buf_ops;
> - bp->b_ops->verify_read(bp);
> + libxfs_readbuf_verify(bp, &xfs_inode_buf_ops);
> if (bp->b_error)
> return;
>
> @@ -460,6 +459,7 @@ pf_read_discontig(
>
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&args->lock);
> libxfs_readbufr_map(mp->m_ddev_targp, bp, 0);
> + bp->b_flags |= LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED;
> libxfs_putbuf(bp);
> pthread_mutex_lock(&args->lock);
> }
> @@ -582,7 +582,8 @@ pf_batch_read(
> if (len < size)
> break;
> memcpy(XFS_BUF_PTR(bplist[i]), pbuf, size);
> - bplist[i]->b_flags |= LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE;
> + bplist[i]->b_flags |= (LIBXFS_B_UPTODATE |
> + LIBXFS_B_UNCHECKED);
> len -= size;
> if (B_IS_INODE(XFS_BUF_PRIORITY(bplist[i])))
> pf_read_inode_dirs(args, bplist[i]);
> --
> 1.9.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-29 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
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 1/9] db: don't claim unchecked CRCs are correct Dave Chinner
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 2/9] db: verify buffer on type change 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 [this message]
2014-04-29 18:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 4/9] repair: detect and correct CRC errors in directory blocks Dave Chinner
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 5/9] repair: detect CRC errors in AG headers Dave Chinner
2014-04-29 14:06 ` Brian Foster
2014-05-01 23:27 ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-29 18:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 6/9] repair: report AG btree verifier errors Dave Chinner
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 7/9] repair: remove more dirv1 leftovers Dave Chinner
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 8/9] repair: handle remote symlink CRC errors Dave Chinner
2014-04-29 14:06 ` Brian Foster
2014-04-29 18:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-04-28 21:04 ` [PATCH 9/9] repair: detect and handle attribute tree " Dave Chinner
2014-04-29 14:06 ` Brian Foster
2014-04-30 3:55 ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-29 18:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- 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
2014-04-15 8:24 [PATCH 0/9] xfs_db, xfs_repair: improve CRC error detection 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
2014-04-15 22:06 ` Brian Foster
2014-04-16 0:41 ` 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=20140429140512.GB59046@bfoster.bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.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).