public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, zlang@kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] xfs/270: Fix ro mount failure when nrext64 option is enabled
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 09:51:33 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220607235133.GR1098723@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220606124101.263872-2-chandan.babu@oracle.com>

On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 06:10:58PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> With nrext64 option enabled at run time, the read-only mount performed by the
> test fails because,
> 1. mkfs.xfs would have calculated log size based on reflink being enabled.
> 2. Clearing the reflink ro compat bit causes log size calculations to yield a
>    different value.
> 3. In the case where nrext64 is enabled, this causes attr reservation to be
>    the largest among all the transaction reservations.
> 4. This ends up causing XFS to require a larger ondisk log size than that
>    which is available.
> 
> This commit fixes the problem by setting features_ro_compat to the value
> obtained by the bitwise-OR of features_ro_compat field with 2^31.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>
> ---
>  tests/xfs/270     | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>  tests/xfs/270.out |  1 -
>  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/270 b/tests/xfs/270
> index 0ab0c7d8..f3796691 100755
> --- a/tests/xfs/270
> +++ b/tests/xfs/270
> @@ -27,8 +27,20 @@ _scratch_mkfs_xfs >>$seqres.full 2>&1
>  # set the highest bit of features_ro_compat, use it as an unknown
>  # feature bit. If one day this bit become known feature, please
>  # change this case.
> -_scratch_xfs_set_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "$((2**31))" "sb 0" | \
> -	grep 'features_ro_compat'
> +ro_compat=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "sb 0")
> +ro_compat=${ro_compat##0x}
> +ro_compat="16#"${ro_compat}
> +ro_compat=$(($ro_compat|16#80000000))
> +ro_compat=$(_scratch_xfs_set_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "$ro_compat" \
> +					    "sb 0" | grep 'features_ro_compat')
> +
> +ro_compat=${ro_compat##features_ro_compat = 0x}
> +ro_compat="16#"${ro_compat}
> +ro_compat=$(($ro_compat&16#80000000))
> +if (( $ro_compat != 16#80000000 )); then
> +	echo "Unable to set most significant bit of features_ro_compat"
> +fi

Urk. Bash - the new line noise generator. :(

This is basically just bit manipulation in hex format. db accepts
hex format integers (i.e. 0x1234), and according to the bash man
page, it understands the 0x1234 prefix as well. So AFAICT there's no
need for this weird "16#" prefix for the bit operations.

But regardless of that, just because you can do something in bash
doesn't mean you should:

wit://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/programming/ShellScriptsBeClearFirst

IMO, this reads much better as something like:

# grab the current ro compat fields and add an invalid high bit.
ro_compat=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "sb 0" | \
		awk '/features_ro_compat/ {
			printf("0x%x\n", or(strtonum($3), 0x80000000)
		}')

# write the new ro compat field to the superblock
_scratch_xfs_set_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "$ro_compat" "sb 0"

# read the newly set ro compat filed for verification
new_ro_compat=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "sb 0" | \
		awk '/features_ro_compat/ {
			printf("0x%x\n", $3)
		}')

# verify the new ro_compat field is correct.
if [ $new_ro_compat != $ro_compat ]; then
	echo "Unable to set new features_ro_compat. Wanted $ro_compat, got $new_ro_compat"
fi

Yes, it's more lines of code, but it's easy to read, easy to
understand, and easy to modify in future.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-06-08  1:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-06 12:40 [PATCH 0/4] Large extent counters tests Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:40 ` [PATCH 1/4] xfs/270: Fix ro mount failure when nrext64 option is enabled Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:31   ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-07 23:51   ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2022-06-08  8:22     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:40 ` [PATCH 2/4] common/xfs: Add helper to check if nrext64 option is supported Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:30   ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-07 23:01   ` Dave Chinner
2022-06-08  8:15     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:41 ` [PATCH 3/4] xfs/547: Verify that the correct inode extent counters are updated with/without nrext64 Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:40   ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-07  9:36     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-08  3:59       ` Zorro Lang
2022-06-08  9:11         ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:41 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs/548: Verify correctness of upgrading an fs to support large extent counters Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:35   ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-07  9:47     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-07 15:20       ` 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=20220607235133.GR1098723@dread.disaster.area \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=zlang@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