From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, billodo@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: verify icount in superblock write
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:07:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180727000715.GJ30972@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180726232028.GC2234@dastard>
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 09:20:28AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:35:25AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> >
> > Add a helper predicate to check the inode count for sanity, then use it
> > in the superblock write verifier to inspect sb_icount.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c | 1 +
> > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_types.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_types.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+)
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> > index b2c683588519..1659016875f9 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> > @@ -714,6 +714,7 @@ xfs_sb_write_verify(
> > * cases.
> > */
> > if (sb.sb_fdblocks > sb.sb_dblocks ||
> > + !xfs_verify_icount(mp, sb.sb_icount) ||
> > sb.sb_ifree > sb.sb_icount) {
> > xfs_notice(mp, "SB summary counter sanity check failed");
> > error = -EFSCORRUPTED;
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_types.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_types.c
> > index 2e2a243cef2e..2e9c0c25ccb6 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_types.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_types.c
> > @@ -171,3 +171,37 @@ xfs_verify_rtbno(
> > {
> > return rtbno < mp->m_sb.sb_rblocks;
> > }
> > +
> > +/* Calculate the range of valid icount values. */
> > +static void
> > +xfs_icount_range(
> > + struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > + unsigned long long *min,
> > + unsigned long long *max)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long long nr_inos = 0;
> > + xfs_agnumber_t agno;
> > +
> > + /* root, rtbitmap, rtsum all live in the first chunk */
> > + *min = XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK;
> > +
> > + for (agno = 0; agno < mp->m_sb.sb_agcount; agno++) {
> > + xfs_agino_t first, last;
> > +
> > + xfs_agino_range(mp, agno, &first, &last);
> > + nr_inos += first - last + 1;
> > + }
> > + *max = nr_inos;
> > +}
>
> And the effect of the inode32 mount option on the valid icount range?
Heh, I wondered about that. The premise of inode32 is that we will
never allocate an inode with a number exceeding 2^32, correct? Do we
ever write anything to that fs to say "this fs must never have inode
numbers > 2^32"? i.e. something that permanently restricts it to
32-bit inode numbers and counts? I don't think I see any such device.
What's supposed to happen if I create a > 1TB fs, put a bunch of files
on it such that some of them end up with inode numbers exceeding 2^32,
unmount it, and then mount it again with inode32? Do we detect this and
refuse the mount because we can't honor the inode32 constraints?
Similarly, what if I create a filesystem with more than 4 billion files
on it, then unmount and remount with inode32? Do we actually detect
this situation and refuse to mount because we know the counter is
already larger than 2^32? If we allow the mount today, should we start
failing superblock writes because sb_icount is greater than 2^32?
In other words, I'm not sure inode32 can have any effect on the icount
*max if we don't refuse the mount if the fs already has 64-bit inodes.
--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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-27 1:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-26 17:35 [PATCH 1/2] libxfs: add more bounds checking to sb sanity checks Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-26 17:35 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: verify icount in superblock write Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-26 17:48 ` Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-26 23:20 ` Dave Chinner
2018-07-27 0:07 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2018-07-27 10:44 ` Brian Foster
2018-07-27 14:30 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-07-27 22:13 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-07-29 4:39 ` Dave Chinner
2018-07-30 12:36 ` Brian Foster
2018-07-26 18:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] libxfs: add more bounds checking to sb sanity checks Bill O'Donnell
2018-07-26 23:28 ` Dave Chinner
2018-07-27 15:05 ` Eric Sandeen
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=20180727000715.GJ30972@magnolia \
--to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=billodo@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--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).