From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] xfs: expand xfs_fsop_geom
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 13:34:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190402173401.GH2899@bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <155413863414.4966.13609556795695536711.stgit@magnolia>
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 10:10:34AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
>
> Rename the current (v2-v4) geometry ioctl XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY_V2 and
> expand the existing xfs_fsop_geom to reserve empty space for more
> fields. This means that newly built binaries will pick up the new
> format and existing programs will simply end up in the V2 handler.
>
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> ---
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_fs.h | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c | 5 +++++
> fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl32.c | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_fs.h b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_fs.h
> index f3aa59302fef..1dba751cde60 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_fs.h
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_fs.h
> @@ -148,7 +148,34 @@ typedef struct xfs_fsop_geom_v1 {
> } xfs_fsop_geom_v1_t;
>
> /*
> - * Output for XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY
> + * Output for XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY_V2
> + */
> +typedef struct xfs_fsop_geom_v2 {
...
> +} xfs_fsop_geom_v2_t;
> +
Do we need the typedef for a new struct?
> +/*
> + * Output for XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY (v5)
> */
> typedef struct xfs_fsop_geom {
> __u32 blocksize; /* filesystem (data) block size */
...
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> index f0309b74e377..c2ca3a816c41 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_sb.c
> @@ -1168,6 +1168,11 @@ xfs_fs_geometry(
>
> geo->logsunit = sbp->sb_logsunit;
>
> + if (struct_version < 5)
> + return 0;
> +
> + geo->version = XFS_FSOP_GEOM_V5;
> +
It's interesting that we've presumably had the version field since
struct_version >= 4, but it's always been set to zero. Now we go and set
it to 5. I'm not sure it really matters, but any idea what's behind
that?
Brian
> return 0;
> }
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> index 6ecdbb3af7de..7fd8815633dc 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> @@ -801,7 +801,7 @@ xfs_ioc_fsgeometry_v1(
> }
>
> STATIC int
> -xfs_ioc_fsgeometry(
> +xfs_ioc_fsgeometry_v2(
> xfs_mount_t *mp,
> void __user *arg)
> {
> @@ -812,6 +812,23 @@ xfs_ioc_fsgeometry(
> if (error)
> return error;
>
> + if (copy_to_user(arg, &fsgeo, sizeof(struct xfs_fsop_geom_v2)))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +STATIC int
> +xfs_ioc_fsgeometry(
> + struct xfs_mount *mp,
> + void __user *arg)
> +{
> + struct xfs_fsop_geom fsgeo;
> + int error;
> +
> + error = xfs_fs_geometry(&mp->m_sb, &fsgeo, 5);
> + if (error)
> + return error;
> +
> if (copy_to_user(arg, &fsgeo, sizeof(fsgeo)))
> return -EFAULT;
> return 0;
> @@ -1938,7 +1955,8 @@ xfs_file_ioctl(
>
> case XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY_V1:
> return xfs_ioc_fsgeometry_v1(mp, arg);
> -
> + case XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY_V2:
> + return xfs_ioc_fsgeometry_v2(mp, arg);
> case XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY:
> return xfs_ioc_fsgeometry(mp, arg);
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl32.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl32.c
> index 5001dca361e9..323cfd4b15dc 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl32.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl32.c
> @@ -561,6 +561,7 @@ xfs_file_compat_ioctl(
> switch (cmd) {
> /* No size or alignment issues on any arch */
> case XFS_IOC_DIOINFO:
> + case XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY_V2:
> case XFS_IOC_FSGEOMETRY:
> case XFS_IOC_FSGETXATTR:
> case XFS_IOC_FSSETXATTR:
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-02 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-01 17:10 [PATCH 00/10] xfs: online health tracking support Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:10 ` [PATCH 01/10] xfs: track metadata health levels Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 13:22 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-02 13:30 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:10 ` [PATCH 02/10] xfs: replace the BAD_SUMMARY mount flag with the equivalent health code Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 13:22 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-01 17:10 ` [PATCH 03/10] xfs: clear BAD_SUMMARY if unmounting an unhealthy filesystem Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 13:24 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-02 13:40 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 13:53 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-02 18:16 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 18:32 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-01 17:10 ` [PATCH 04/10] xfs: expand xfs_fsop_geom Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 17:34 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2019-04-02 21:53 ` Dave Chinner
2019-04-02 22:31 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:10 ` [PATCH 05/10] xfs: add a new ioctl to describe allocation group geometry Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 17:34 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-02 21:35 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:10 ` [PATCH 06/10] xfs: report fs and rt health via geometry structure Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 17:35 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-02 18:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-02 23:34 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:10 ` [PATCH 07/10] xfs: report AG health via AG geometry ioctl Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-03 14:30 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-03 16:11 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-04 11:48 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-05 20:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-08 11:34 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-09 3:25 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:11 ` [PATCH 08/10] xfs: report inode health via bulkstat Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:11 ` [PATCH 09/10] xfs: scrub/repair should update filesystem metadata health Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-04 11:50 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-04 18:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-05 13:07 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-05 20:54 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-08 11:35 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-09 3:30 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-01 17:11 ` [PATCH 10/10] xfs: update health status if we get a clean bill of health Darrick J. Wong
2019-04-04 11:51 ` Brian Foster
2019-04-04 15:48 ` 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=20190402173401.GH2899@bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.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).