From: Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@gmail.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.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: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 15:12:30 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8943600.hOzF94syPF@garuda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200918155452.GA7955@magnolia>
On Friday 18 September 2020 9:24:52 PM IST Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> 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.
You are right. I will include this change in the next version.
>
> 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
>
--
chandan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-19 9:42 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
2020-09-19 9:42 ` Chandan Babu R [this message]
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=8943600.hOzF94syPF@garuda \
--to=chandanrlinux@gmail.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.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