From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] xfs: online repair of symbolic links
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:10:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zd-vaC5xjJ_YgeD6@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240228205213.GS1927156@frogsfrogsfrogs>
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 12:52:13PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> I overlooked something this morning -- if the caller passes in
> XFS_SCRUB_IFLAG_FORCE_REBUILD, that might be the free space defragmenter
> trying to get us to move the remote target block somewhere else. For
> that usecase, if the symlink scrub doesn't find any problems and we read
> in exactly i_size bytes, I think we want to write that back to the
> symlink, and not the DUMMY_TARGET.
Yes, I think we really want that :)
> Something like:
>
> if (FORCE_REBUILD && !CORRUPT) {
Maybe I need to read the code a little more, but shouldn't this
simply be !corrupt? Or an assert that if it is not corrupt it is
a force rebuild? Or am I missing a use case for !corrupt &&
!force_rebuild?
> /*
> * Change an empty target into a dummy target and clear the symlink
> * target zapped flag.
> */
> if (target_buf[0] == 0) {
> sc->sick_mask |= XFS_SICK_INO_SYMLINK_ZAPPED;
> sprintf(target_buf, DUMMY_TARGET);
> }
>
> Can we allow that without risking truncation making the symlink point to
> some unintended place?
I can't think of anything that would truncated it, what do you have in
mind?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-28 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-27 2:18 [PATCHSET v29.['hch@lst.de'] 11/13] xfs: online repair of symbolic links Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-27 2:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-27 2:32 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-28 17:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-28 18:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-28 18:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-28 20:52 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-28 22:10 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2024-02-28 23:46 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-29 13:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-29 17:16 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-29 19:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-03-27 1:49 [PATCHSET v30.1 12/15] " Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-27 2:05 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-27 16:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-03-29 20:44 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-03-29 20:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-12-31 19:45 [PATCHSET v29.0 23/40] xfsprogs: " Darrick J. Wong
2023-12-31 22:35 ` [PATCH 1/1] xfs: " Darrick J. Wong
2023-12-31 19:31 [PATCHSET v29.0 24/28] " Darrick J. Wong
2023-12-31 20:39 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-26 0:36 [PATCHSET v25.0 0/1] " Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-26 1:36 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Darrick J. Wong
2022-12-30 22:14 [PATCHSET v24.0 0/1] " Darrick J. Wong
2022-12-30 22:14 ` [PATCH 1/1] " 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=Zd-vaC5xjJ_YgeD6@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--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