From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: add a if_xfs_meta_bad macro for testing and logging bad metadata
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:01:43 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191113000143.GC6219@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191111134904.GB46312@bfoster>
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 08:51:19AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 05:17:58PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> >
> > Add a new macro, if_xfs_meta_bad, which we will use to integrate some
> > corruption reporting when the corruption test expression is true. This
> > will be used in the next patch to remove the ugly XFS_WANT_CORRUPT*
> > macros.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> > ---
>
> Ooh a new bikeshed... :)
>
> > fs/xfs/xfs_linux.h | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_linux.h b/fs/xfs/xfs_linux.h
> > index 2271db4e8d66..d0fb1e612c42 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_linux.h
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_linux.h
> > @@ -229,6 +229,10 @@ int xfs_rw_bdev(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector, unsigned int count,
> > #define ASSERT(expr) \
> > (likely(expr) ? (void)0 : assfail(NULL, #expr, __FILE__, __LINE__))
> >
> > +#define xfs_meta_bad(mp, expr) \
> > + (unlikely(expr) ? assfail((mp), #expr, __FILE__, __LINE__), \
> > + true : false)
> > +
> > #else /* !DEBUG */
> >
> > #ifdef XFS_WARN
> > @@ -236,13 +240,23 @@ int xfs_rw_bdev(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector, unsigned int count,
> > #define ASSERT(expr) \
> > (likely(expr) ? (void)0 : asswarn(NULL, #expr, __FILE__, __LINE__))
> >
> > +#define xfs_meta_bad(mp, expr) \
> > + (unlikely(expr) ? asswarn((mp), #expr, __FILE__, __LINE__), \
> > + true : false)
> > +
> > #else /* !DEBUG && !XFS_WARN */
> >
> > -#define ASSERT(expr) ((void)0)
> > +#define ASSERT(expr) ((void)0)
> > +
> > +#define xfs_meta_bad(mp, expr) \
> > + (unlikely(expr) ? XFS_ERROR_REPORT(#expr, XFS_ERRLEVEL_LOW, (mp)), \
> > + true : false)
> >
> > #endif /* XFS_WARN */
> > #endif /* DEBUG */
> >
> > +#define if_xfs_meta_bad(mp, expr) if (xfs_meta_bad((mp), (expr)))
> > +
> d
> FWIW, 'xfs_meta_bad' doesn't really tell me anything about what the
> macro is for, particularly since the logic that determines whether
> metadata is bad is fed into it. IOW, I read that and expect the macro to
> actually do something generic to determine whether metadata is bad.
>
> Also having taken a quick look at the next patch, I agree with Christoph
> on embedding if logic into the macro itself, at least with respect to
> readability. It makes the code look like a typo/syntax error to me. :P
It's not just you. ;)
> I agree that the existing macros are ugly, but they at least express
> operational semantics reasonably well between [_RETURN|_GOTO]. If we
> really want to fix the latter bit, perhaps the best incremental step is
> to drop the branching logic and naming portion from the existing macros
> and leave everything else as is (from the commit logs, it sounds like
> this is more along the lines of your previous version, just without the
> name change). From there perhaps we can come up with better naming
> eventually. Just a thought.
<nod> I couldn't come up with much better than XFS_IS_CORRUPT, though I
see Dave's point about:
if (XFS_IS_CORRUPT(mp,
xfs_measure_something() > BADNESS) {
xfs_error(mp, "OHNO");
return -EFSCORRUPTED;
}
Is a bit hard to read.
if (XFS_IS_CORRUPT(mp,
xfs_measure_something() > BADNESS) {
xfs_error(mp, "OHNO");
return -EFSCORRUPTED;
}
Isn't awesome either, but it at least works and is a bit more obvious.
:/
--D
> Brian
>
> > #define STATIC static noinline
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_XFS_RT
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-13 0:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-11 1:17 [PATCH v4 0/3] xfs: refactor corruption returns Darrick J. Wong
2019-11-11 1:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: add a if_xfs_meta_bad macro for testing and logging bad metadata Darrick J. Wong
2019-11-11 13:51 ` Brian Foster
2019-11-13 0:01 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2019-11-11 1:18 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs: kill the XFS_WANT_CORRUPT_* macros Darrick J. Wong
2019-11-11 8:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-11-12 23:08 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-11-11 1:18 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: convert open coded corruption check to use XFS_IS_CORRUPT 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=20191113000143.GC6219@magnolia \
--to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.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