From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: introduce XFS_MAX_FILEOFF
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:04:15 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200108230415.GM5552@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200108224216.GH23128@dread.disaster.area>
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 09:42:16AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 02:32:38PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 07:40:41AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 08:17:38PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> > > >
> > > > Introduce a new #define for the maximum supported file block offset.
> > > > We'll use this in the next patch to make it more obvious that we're
> > > > doing some operation for all possible inode fork mappings after a given
> > > > offset. We can't use ULLONG_MAX here because bunmapi uses that to
> > > > detect when it's done.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_format.h | 1 +
> > > > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c | 3 ++-
> > > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_format.h b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_format.h
> > > > index 1b7dcbae051c..c2976e441d43 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_format.h
> > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_format.h
> > > > @@ -1540,6 +1540,7 @@ typedef struct xfs_bmdr_block {
> > > > #define BMBT_BLOCKCOUNT_BITLEN 21
> > > >
> > > > #define BMBT_STARTOFF_MASK ((1ULL << BMBT_STARTOFF_BITLEN) - 1)
> > > > +#define XFS_MAX_FILEOFF (BMBT_STARTOFF_MASK)
> > >
> > > Isn't the maximum file offset in the BMBT the max start offset + the
> > > max length of the extent that is located at BMBT_STARTOFF_MASK?
> >
> > Apologies for responding to a question with another question, but has
> > there ever been an XFS that supported an inode size of more than 8EB?
>
> Doubt it.
>
> > Linux supports at most a file offset of 8EB, which is 2^63-1, or
> > 0x7FFF,FFFF,FFFF,FFFF. On a filesystem with 512-byte blocks, the very
> > last byte in the file would be in block 2^54-1, or 0x3F,FFFF,FFFF,FFFF.
> > Larger blocksizes decrease that even further (e.g. 2^47-1, or
> > 0x7FFF,FFFF,FFFF on 64k block filesystems).
> >
> > Therefore, on Linux I conclude that the largest file offset (block)
> > possible is 2^54-1, which is BMBT_STARTOFF_MASK. Unless there's an
> > XFS port that actually supports 16EB files, BMBT_STARTOFF_MASK will
> > suffice here.
>
> Sure, but my point was that checks against the max file offset
> as a block count are applied to the startoff field, not the
> startoff + blockcount value, so we can potentially get extents on
> disk beyond the above definition of XFS_MAX_FILEOFF...
>
> i.e. startoff can be < XFS_MAX_FILEOFF, but startoff + blockcount
> can be > XFS_MAX_FILEOFF, and there's nothing in the code that
> prevents that from occurring...
>
> e.g. what's preventing speculative delalloc from going beyond
> XFS_MAX_FILEOFF, even though the actual file offset that is being
> written is within XFS_MAX_FILEOFF?
I thought we constrained the @prealloc_blocks argument to
xfs_bmapi_reserve_delalloc based on s_maxbytes:
p_end_fsb = min(p_end_fsb,
XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, mp->m_super->s_maxbytes));
But as there's nothing in the verifiers or anywhere else prohibiting
this, I'll change it to (BMBT_STARTOFF_MASK + MAXEXTLEN) for now.
--D
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-08 23:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-08 4:17 [PATCH v2 0/3] xfs: fix maxbytes problems on 32-bit systems Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-08 4:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: introduce XFS_MAX_FILEOFF Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-08 8:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-01-08 16:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-08 20:40 ` Dave Chinner
2020-01-08 22:32 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-08 22:42 ` Dave Chinner
2020-01-08 23:04 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2020-01-08 4:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs: truncate should remove all blocks, not just to the end of the page cache Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-08 8:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-01-08 16:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-08 4:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: fix s_maxbytes computation on 32-bit kernels Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-08 8:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-01-09 18:44 [PATCH v3 0/3] xfs: fix maxbytes problems on 32-bit systems Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-09 18:44 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: introduce XFS_MAX_FILEOFF Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-10 11:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20200108230415.GM5552@magnolia \
--to=darrick.wong@oracle.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