[ANNOUNCE] xfsprogs for-next updated to 5d0807ad

[ANNOUNCE] xfsprogs for-next updated to 5d0807ad

[Eric Sandeen]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2598 bytes --]

Hi folks,

The for-next branch of the xfsprogs repository at:

	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsprogs-dev.git

has just been updated.

Patches often get missed, so please check if your outstanding
patches were in this update. If they have not been in this update,
please resubmit them to linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org so they can be
picked up in the next update.

The new head of the for-next branch is commit:

5d0807ad libxfs-apply: use git am instead of patch

New Commits:

Christoph Hellwig (11):
      [bbe12eb9] xfsprogs: remove libreadline support
      [d5b6e335] xfsprogs: remove xfs_dir_ops
      [b98cd1f7] libxfs: use tabs instead of spaces in div_u64
      [30f8e916] db: fix a comment in scan_freelist
      [27cd356f] db: add a comment to agfl_crc_flds
      [8e9a788f] db: cleanup attr_set_f and attr_remove_f
      [38cff22d] db: validate name and namelen in attr_set_f and attr_remove_f
      [951e17bc] db: ensure that create and replace are exclusive in attr_set_f
      [0c02ef9b] repair: cleanup build_agf_agfl
      [f19a627b] metadump: small cleanup for process_inode
      [5d0807ad] libxfs-apply: use git am instead of patch

Darrick J. Wong (3):
      [b0c0cdb7] libxcmd: don't crash if el_gets returns null
      [8c4d190e] find_api_violations: fix sed expression
      [7161cd21] xfs_db: bounds-check access to the dbmap array

Eric Sandeen (1):
      [baed08dd] xfs_io: copy_range can take up to 8 arguments


Code Diffstat:

 configure.ac                 |  7 ----
 db/Makefile                  |  5 ---
 db/agfl.c                    |  1 +
 db/attrset.c                 | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 db/check.c                   | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++-
 db/input.c                   | 26 +------------
 db/metadump.c                |  3 +-
 growfs/Makefile              |  3 --
 include/builddefs.in         |  2 -
 include/xfs_inode.h          |  2 -
 include/xfs_mount.h          |  3 --
 io/Makefile                  |  4 --
 io/copy_file_range.c         |  2 +-
 libxcmd/Makefile             |  5 ---
 libxcmd/input.c              | 38 ++++++++-----------
 libxfs/libxfs_priv.h         |  4 +-
 libxfs/rdwr.c                |  8 ----
 libxfs/util.c                |  8 ----
 quota/Makefile               |  5 ---
 repair/phase5.c              |  7 +---
 repair/phase6.c              |  1 -
 spaceman/Makefile            |  4 --
 tools/find-api-violations.sh | 10 ++++-
 tools/libxfs-apply           |  4 +-
 24 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 158 deletions(-)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 873 bytes --]

Re: [ANNOUNCE] xfsprogs for-next updated to 5d0807ad

[Christoph Hellwig]

Btw, some time after xfsprogs 5.6, xfstests generic/590 start to fail
with new xfs_check errors in the form of:

rtblock 1048576 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048576 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048580 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048580 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048584 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048584 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048588 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048588 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048592 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048592 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048596 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048596 beyond end of expected area
rtblock 1048600 beyond end of expected area

Re: [ANNOUNCE] xfsprogs for-next updated to 5d0807ad

[Darrick J. Wong]

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:32:46AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Btw, some time after xfsprogs 5.6, xfstests generic/590 start to fail
> with new xfs_check errors in the form of:
> 
> rtblock 1048576 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048576 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048580 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048580 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048584 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048584 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048588 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048588 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048592 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048592 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048596 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048596 beyond end of expected area
> rtblock 1048600 beyond end of expected area
> 
> 

That's probably the bounds check I added in commit
7161cd21b3ed3fa82aef1f13b2bcfae045208573

So either I've gotten the units wron.... aha, I see it:

static inline bool
rdbmap_boundscheck(
	xfs_rfsblock_t	bno)
{
	return bno < mp->m_sb.sb_agblocks;
}

That should have been sb_rblocks.

--D