From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.131]:4449 "EHLO ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751100AbeAEBTa (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jan 2018 20:19:30 -0500 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 12:17:14 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/21] xfs: catch a few more error codes when scrubbing secondary sb Message-ID: <20180105011714.GP30682@dastard> References: <151398977028.18741.12031215574014508438.stgit@magnolia> <151398978264.18741.5137794501763948676.stgit@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <151398978264.18741.5137794501763948676.stgit@magnolia> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 04:43:02PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong > > The superblock validation routines return a variety of error codes to > reject a mount request. For scrub we can assume that the mount > succeeded, so if we see these things appear when scrubbing secondary sb > X, we can treat them all like corruption. > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong > --- > fs/xfs/scrub/agheader.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/agheader.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/agheader.c > index b599358..97beb47 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/scrub/agheader.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/agheader.c > @@ -126,6 +126,22 @@ xfs_scrub_superblock( > error = xfs_trans_read_buf(mp, sc->tp, mp->m_ddev_targp, > XFS_AGB_TO_DADDR(mp, agno, XFS_SB_BLOCK(mp)), > XFS_FSS_TO_BB(mp, 1), 0, &bp, &xfs_sb_buf_ops); > + /* > + * The superblock verifier can return several different error codes > + * if it thinks the superblock doesn't look right. For a mount these > + * would all get bounced back to userspace, but if we're here then the > + * fs mounted successfully, which means that this secondary superblock > + * is simply incorrect. Treat all these codes the same way we treat > + * any corruption. > + */ > + switch (error) { > + case -EINVAL: /* also -EWRONGFS */ > + case -ENOSYS: > + case -EFBIG: > + error = -EFSCORRUPTED; > + default: > + break; > + } > if (!xfs_scrub_process_error(sc, agno, XFS_SB_BLOCK(mp), &error)) > return error; Yes, this change looks fine, so Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner However, what I just realised is that the in-memory primary superblock buffer that we do all our normal modification/logging work on is an uncached buffer that accessed through xfs_getsb(), not a cached buffer we access through xfs_trans_read_buf(). Does the scrub code take this into account? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com