public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 03/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when punching a hole
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 08:54:52 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200918155452.GA7955@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200918094759.2727564-4-chandanrlinux@gmail.com>

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:17:52PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> The extent mapping the file offset at which a hole has to be
> inserted will be split into two extents causing extent count to
> increase by 1.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@gmail.com>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h |  7 +++++++
>  fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_item.c         |  5 +++++
>  fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c         | 10 ++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h
> index 7fc2b129a2e7..bcac769a7df6 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h
> @@ -40,6 +40,13 @@ struct xfs_ifork {
>   */
>  #define XFS_IEXT_ADD_NOSPLIT_CNT	(1)
>  
> +/*
> + * Punching out an extent from the middle of an existing extent can cause the
> + * extent count to increase by 1.
> + * i.e. | Old extent | Hole | Old extent |
> + */
> +#define XFS_IEXT_PUNCH_HOLE_CNT		(1)
> +
>  /*
>   * Fork handling.
>   */
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_item.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_item.c
> index ec3691372e7c..5c7d08da8ff1 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_item.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_item.c
> @@ -519,6 +519,11 @@ xfs_bui_item_recover(
>  	}
>  	xfs_trans_ijoin(tp, ip, 0);
>  
> +	error = xfs_iext_count_may_overflow(ip, whichfork,
> +			XFS_IEXT_PUNCH_HOLE_CNT);

I think this ought to be XFS_IEXT_ADD_NOSPLIT_CNT if bui_type is
XFS_BMAP_MAP and XFS_IEXT_PUNCH_HOLE_CNT if XFS_BMAP_UNMAP.

Whoever created the BUI should have called xfs_iext_count_may_overflow
before logging the BUI (and hence this should never occur) but it does
pay to be careful. :)

The rest of the logic in the patch looks ok.

--D

> +	if (error)
> +		goto err_inode;
> +
>  	count = bmap->me_len;
>  	error = xfs_trans_log_finish_bmap_update(tp, budp, type, ip, whichfork,
>  			bmap->me_startoff, bmap->me_startblock, &count, state);
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c
> index dcd6e61df711..0776abd0103c 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c
> @@ -891,6 +891,11 @@ xfs_unmap_extent(
>  
>  	xfs_trans_ijoin(tp, ip, 0);
>  
> +	error = xfs_iext_count_may_overflow(ip, XFS_DATA_FORK,
> +			XFS_IEXT_PUNCH_HOLE_CNT);
> +	if (error)
> +		goto out_trans_cancel;
> +
>  	error = xfs_bunmapi(tp, ip, startoffset_fsb, len_fsb, 0, 2, done);
>  	if (error)
>  		goto out_trans_cancel;
> @@ -1176,6 +1181,11 @@ xfs_insert_file_space(
>  	xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
>  	xfs_trans_ijoin(tp, ip, 0);
>  
> +	error = xfs_iext_count_may_overflow(ip, XFS_DATA_FORK,
> +			XFS_IEXT_PUNCH_HOLE_CNT);
> +	if (error)
> +		goto out_trans_cancel;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * The extent shifting code works on extent granularity. So, if stop_fsb
>  	 * is not the starting block of extent, we need to split the extent at
> -- 
> 2.28.0
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2020-09-18 15:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-18  9:47 [PATCH V4 00/10] Bail out if transaction can cause extent count to overflow Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 01/10] xfs: Add helper for checking per-inode extent count overflow Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 02/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when trivally adding a new extent Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 03/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when punching a hole Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18 15:54   ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2020-09-19  9:42     ` Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 04/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when adding/removing xattrs Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18 15:49   ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 05/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when adding/removing dir entries Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 06/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when writing to unwritten extent Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 07/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when moving extent from cow to data fork Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 08/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when remapping an extent Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 09/10] xfs: Check for extent overflow when swapping extents Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18 15:44   ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-09-19  9:44     ` Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18  9:47 ` [PATCH V4 10/10] xfs: Introduce error injection to reduce maximum inode fork extent count Chandan Babu R
2020-09-18 15:39   ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-09-19  9:45     ` Chandan Babu R

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=20200918155452.GA7955@magnolia \
    --to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=chandanrlinux@gmail.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