linux-xfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/12] xfs: more and better verifiers
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 17:10:09 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170831001009.GD3775@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170829222247.GF10621@dastard>

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 08:22:47AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 08:11:59AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:13:33AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > So what do you think of the version that adds real printks for
> > > each condition including more details like the one verifier I
> > > did below?  Probably needs some unlikely annotations, though.
> > 
> > Given that there was another resend of the series I'd be really
> > curious about the answer to this?
> 
> If we increase the size of the hexdump on error, then most of the
> specific numbers in the print statements can be pulled from the
> hexdump. And if the verifier tells us exactly what check failed,
> we don't have to decode the entire hexdump to know what field was
> out of band.

How much do we increase the size of the hexdump?  64 -> 128?  Or
whatever the structure header size is?  How about if xfs_error_level >=
XFS_ERRORLEVEL_HIGH then we dump the entire buffer?

> Perhaps what we should think about here is adding a mode to xfs_db
> to decode the hexdump into structured output so we don't have to
> manually decode the hex dumps ever again....

Seems useful, yes.

--D

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dave.
> -- 
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-31  0:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-17 23:31 [RFC 00/12] xfs: more and better verifiers Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 01/12] xfs: refactor long-format btree header verification routines Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 02/12] xfs: remove XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN from dir3 data verifiers Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 03/12] xfs: have buffer verifier functions report failing address Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19  2:19   ` [PATCH v2 " Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:31 ` [PATCH 04/12] xfs: refactor verifier callers to print address of failing check Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 05/12] xfs: verify dinode header first Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 06/12] xfs: move inode fork verifiers to xfs_dinode_verify Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 07/12] xfs: create structure verifier function for shortform xattrs Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 08/12] xfs: create structure verifier function for short form symlinks Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 09/12] xfs: refactor short form directory structure verifier function Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 10/12] xfs: provide a centralized method for verifying inline fork data Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 11/12] xfs: fail out of xfs_attr3_leaf_lookup_int if it looks corrupt Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-17 23:32 ` [PATCH 12/12] xfs: create a new buf_ops pointer to verify structure metadata Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-18  7:05 ` [RFC 00/12] xfs: more and better verifiers Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-18 17:06   ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-18 18:45     ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-18 18:59       ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19  0:33       ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-19  0:58         ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19  1:12           ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-19  1:17             ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-19 23:20               ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-21  8:13     ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-29 15:11       ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-29 16:57         ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-29 22:22         ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31  0:10           ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2017-08-31  2:43             ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31  3:05               ` Eric Sandeen
2017-08-31  3:27                 ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31  5:44                   ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-08-31 23:37                     ` Dave Chinner
2017-08-31 23:49                       ` Darrick J. Wong

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=20170831001009.GD3775@magnolia \
    --to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).