From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:50984 "EHLO aserp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751303AbeFEDiE (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2018 23:38:04 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 20:38:00 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] xfs: more verifications! Message-ID: <20180605033800.GA9437@magnolia> References: <20180605024313.18737-1-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180605024313.18737-1-david@fromorbit.com> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Dave Chinner Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 12:43:10PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > Hi folks, > > This patchset addresses a series of corruptions noticed in an image > provided by Wen Xu. The patches only address detecting corruptions > before they can do damage - it does not address/fix the crash the > image caused but instead prevents the bad information from getting > to the point where it can cause a crash. > > The third patch addresses a general btree record validation issue; > we should probably dirve this inwards to each btree implementation > with a ->verify_record() callout, as this patch does not address > all the places that btree records are traversed during searches. It > will catch any attempt to use a bad record that a search lands on, > however. > > Comments? So, uh, does xfs_repair catch all these things and fix them? I wonder if online repair catches and fixes them too, but I won't yet start heckling people about that. :P --D > -Dave. > > > -- > 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