From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] (and bad attr2 bug) - pack xfs_sb_t for 64-bit arches
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 09:41:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <464C69A4.6050605@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <455CB54F.8080901@sandeen.net>
Eric Sandeen wrote:
> see also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212201
>
> Bugzilla Bug 212201: Cannot build sysem with XFS file system.
>
> I turned on attr2 in FC6 at nathan's suggestion, for selinux goodness
> with more efficient xattr space usage.
>
> But, many reports that this was totally broken in fc6, on x86_64.
Although it turned out to be a different issue, not the packing issue,
is the packing/alignment (below) still something that needs to be fixed...?
-Eric
> Install went ok, but on reboot the filesystem was found to be corrupt.
>
> The filesystem was also found to be marked w/ attr1, not attr2....
>
> If you do a fresh mkfs.xfs on x86_64, with -i attr=2, and dump out the
> superblock (or look at it with xfs_db) you will find that although the
> versionnum says that there is a morebits bit, the features2 flag is 0.
>
> if you dd/hexdump the superblock, you will find the attr2 flag, but at
> the wrong offset.
>
> This is because the xfs_sb_t struct is padded out to 64 bits on 64-bit
> arches, and the xfs_xlatesb() routine and xfs_sb_info[] array take this
> padding to mean that the last item is 4 bytes bigger than it is, and
> treats sb_features2 as 8 bytes not four. This then gets endian-flipped out...
>
> I can't quite figure out how this winds up causing problems if you stay
> on the x86_64 arch, as I'd expect that if the offset is wrong, it should
> at least be consistently wrong. And in fact if you do mkfs,mount,xfs_info,
> it will tell you that you do have attr2. But somewhere along the line thing
> go wrong, and post-install, post-reboot, the filesystem thinks it is attr1,
> and is therefore corrupt.
>
> I think that maybe some accesses are post-xfs_xlatesb, while others
> may access the un-flipped sb directly? Or maybe this is sb logging
> code that has messed things up? Not sure... needs more investigation.
>
> In any case, dd does not lie, and this patch for the kernel, and a
> corresponding one for userspace, at least make "mkfs.xfs -i attr=2"
> puts the features2 flag in the right place, as shown by inspection via dd.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
>
> Index: linux-2.6.18/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.18.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.h
> +++ linux-2.6.18/fs/xfs/xfs_sb.h
> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ typedef struct xfs_sb
> __uint16_t sb_logsectsize; /* sector size for the log, bytes */
> __uint32_t sb_logsunit; /* stripe unit size for the log */
> __uint32_t sb_features2; /* additional feature bits */
> -} xfs_sb_t;
> +} __attribute__ ((packed)) xfs_sb_t;
>
> /*
> * Sequence number values for the fields.
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-17 14:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-16 19:00 [PATCH] (and bad attr2 bug) - pack xfs_sb_t for 64-bit arches Eric Sandeen
2006-11-16 22:10 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-20 3:50 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-21 4:02 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-22 1:02 ` Russell Cattelan
2006-11-22 8:59 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-11-22 15:44 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-22 16:24 ` Russell Cattelan
2006-11-22 16:38 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-23 7:09 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-11-23 17:37 ` Russell Cattelan
2006-11-24 4:47 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-11-27 12:50 ` Tim Shimmin
2006-11-29 9:56 ` [PATCH] attr2 patch for data btrees & attr 2 was: " Timothy Shimmin
2006-11-23 22:49 ` [PATCH] " David Chinner
2006-11-16 22:45 ` David Chinner
2006-11-16 22:55 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-17 15:53 ` Russell Cattelan
2006-11-17 1:08 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-11-17 2:39 ` David Chinner
2006-11-17 4:11 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-11-17 5:55 ` David Chinner
2006-11-17 6:34 ` sandeen
2006-11-17 6:52 ` Nathan Scott
2006-11-17 15:20 ` sandeen
2006-11-19 23:11 ` Nathan Scott
2006-11-20 1:39 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-20 3:00 ` Nathan Scott
2006-11-20 3:32 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-20 3:37 ` Nathan Scott
2006-11-17 6:58 ` David Chinner
2006-11-17 23:49 ` Eric Sandeen
2007-05-17 14:41 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2007-05-21 7:42 ` David Chinner
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=464C69A4.6050605@sandeen.net \
--to=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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