From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs_copy: fix up initial sb buffer read on CRC fs
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:45:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150721154547.GG23013@bfoster.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9B4E8358-4DAC-4092-AF1F-A9E5A71C18C5@sandeen.net>
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:11:05AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
>
> > On Jul 21, 2015, at 7:31 AM, Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:20:30PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> My prior commit, aaf90a2 xfs_copy: fix copy of hard 4k devices
> >> causes xfs_copy to emit a CRC error warning when copying a
> >> CRC filesystem.
> >>
> >> This is because we are now reading the maximum sector size,
> >> and attempting to verify the CRC based on that (likely incorrect)
> >> length.
> >>
> >> In xfs_db, we currently just don't verify this read, so it's
> >> not a problem. In xfs_copy, we almost certainly want to verify.
> >>
> >> So, first do the maximal read with no verifier; once it's read,
> >> drop that buffer, and re-read with the proper sector size and
> >> verifier.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> diff --git a/copy/xfs_copy.c b/copy/xfs_copy.c
> >> index 44a32e8..fd96e15 100644
> >> --- a/copy/xfs_copy.c
> >> +++ b/copy/xfs_copy.c
> >> @@ -654,11 +654,17 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> >>
> >> memset(&mbuf, 0, sizeof(xfs_mount_t));
> >> libxfs_buftarg_init(&mbuf, xargs.ddev, xargs.logdev, xargs.rtdev);
> >> + /* We don't yet know the sector size, so read maximal size */
> >> sbp = libxfs_readbuf(mbuf.m_ddev_targp, XFS_SB_DADDR,
> >> - 1 << (XFS_MAX_SECTORSIZE_LOG - BBSHIFT),
> >> - 0, &xfs_sb_buf_ops);
> >> + 1 << (XFS_MAX_SECTORSIZE_LOG - BBSHIFT), 0, NULL);
> >> sb = &mbuf.m_sb;
> >> libxfs_sb_from_disk(sb, XFS_BUF_TO_SBP(sbp));
> >> + /* Do it again, now with proper length and verifier */
> >> + libxfs_putbuf(sbp);
> >> + libxfs_purgebuf(sbp);
> >
> > Why the purge? On a quick look, it looks like the buffer cache code
> > would handle this if the buffer size changes.
> >
> > Hmm, is it to ensure the verification occurs if the buffer size doesn't
> > actually change? If so, I'd suggest to enhance the comment. :)
> >
> Without the purge, a re-read of a different size at the same offset seems to cause cache mismatch problems.
>
Ok, fair enough. Care to update the comment? Otherwise this seems good
to me:
Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
> Eric
>
> > Brian
> >
> >> + sbp = libxfs_readbuf(mbuf.m_ddev_targp, XFS_SB_DADDR,
> >> + 1 << (sb->sb_sectlog - BBSHIFT),
> >> + 0, &xfs_sb_buf_ops);
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * For now, V5 superblock filesystems are not supported without -d;
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-21 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-16 18:20 [PATCH] xfs_copy: fix up initial sb buffer read on CRC fs Eric Sandeen
2015-07-21 12:31 ` Brian Foster
2015-07-21 15:11 ` Eric Sandeen
2015-07-21 15:45 ` Brian Foster [this message]
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=20150721154547.GG23013@bfoster.bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--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