Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mkfs: make use of xfs_validate_stripe_factors()

[Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>]

Hi Brian,

On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 09:06:51AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 01:24:21PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > Check stripe numbers in calc_stripe_factors() by using
> > xfs_validate_stripe_factors().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  libxfs/libxfs_api_defs.h |  1 +
> >  mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c          | 23 +++++++----------------
> >  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > 
> ...
> > @@ -2344,11 +2334,12 @@ _("data stripe width (%d) must be a multiple of the data stripe unit (%d)\n"),
> >  
> >  	/* if no stripe config set, use the device default */
> >  	if (!dsunit) {
> > -		/* Ignore nonsense from device.  XXX add more validation */
> > -		if (ft->dsunit && ft->dswidth == 0) {
> > +		/* Ignore nonsense from device report. */
> > +		if (!libxfs_validate_stripe_factors(NULL, BBTOB(ft->dsunit),
> > +						    BBTOB(ft->dswidth), 0)) {
> 
> The logic seems fine and from the previous comment it sounds like we're
> lacking validation in this particular scenario, but do we want to print
> more error noise from the validation helper in scenarios where failure
> is not a fatal error?

Yeah, If I understand correctly, I think that is an open question here,
so I think you suggested that we could silence for this case by passing
a "bool silent" argument? or some better idea for this?

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> Brian
> 
> >  			fprintf(stderr,
> > -_("%s: Volume reports stripe unit of %d bytes and stripe width of 0, ignoring.\n"),
> > -				progname, BBTOB(ft->dsunit));
> > +_("%s: Volume reports invalid stripe unit (%d) and stripe width (%d), ignoring.\n"),
> > +				progname, BBTOB(ft->dsunit), BBTOB(ft->dswidth));
> >  			ft->dsunit = 0;
> >  			ft->dswidth = 0;
> >  		} else {
> > -- 
> > 2.18.1
> > 
>