Re: [PATCH v3 REBASED 0/3] btrfs: fix issues due to alien device

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 30.04.20 г. 20:54 ч., Anand Jain wrote:
> 
> 
> On 30/4/20 2:05 pm, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28.04.20 г. 18:22 ч., Anand Jain wrote:
>>> v3 REBASED: Based on the latest misc-next. for for-5.8.
>>>     Dropped the following patches as there were concerns about the usage
>>>     of error code -EUCLEAN
>>>     btrfs: remove identified alien device in open_fs_devices
>>>     btrfs: remove identified alien btrfs device in open_fs_devices
>>>
>>>     Rmaining 3 patches here have obtained reviewed-by. With this pathset
>>>     the pertaining fstests btrfs/197 and btrfs/198 (which tests 3 bugs)
>>>     would pass as the patch 2/3 fixed a bug and 3/3 fixed the trigger
>>>     of 2 other bugs (patch 1/3 is just a cleanup). Further at the moment
>>>     I am not sure if there is any other trigger where it could again
>>> leave
>>>     an alien device in the fs_devices leading to the same/similar bugs.
>>>
>>> ==== original email ====
>>> v3: Fix alien device is due to wipefs in Patch4.
>>>      Fix a nit in Patch3.
>>>      Patches are reordered.
>>>
>>> Alien device is a device in fs_devices list having a different fsid than
>>> the expected fsid or no btrfs_magic. This patch set fixes issues
>>> found due
>>> to the same.
>>>
>>> Patch1: is a cleanup patch, not related.
>>> Patch2: fixes failing to mount a degraded RAIDs (RAID1/5/6/10), by
>>>     hardening the function btrfs_free_extra_devids().
>>> Patch3: fixes the missing device (due to alien btrfs-device) not
>>> missing in
>>>     the userland, by hardening the function btrfs_open_one_device().
>>> Patch4: fixes the missing device (due to alien device) not missing in
>>>     the userland, by returning EUCLEAN in btrfs_read_dev_one_super().
>>> Patch5: eliminates the source of the alien device in the fs_devices.
>>>
>>> PS: Fundamentally its wrong approach that btrfs-progs deduces the device
>>> missing state in the userland instead of obtaining it from the kernel.
>>> I remember objecting on the btrfs-progs patch which did that, but still
>>> it got merged, bugs in p3 and p4 are its side effects. I wrote
>>> patches to read device_state from the kernel using ioctl, procfs and
>>> sysfs but it didn't get the due attention till a merger.
>>>
>>> Anand Jain (3):
>>>    btrfs: drop useless goto in open_fs_devices
>>>    btrfs: include non-missing as a qualifier for the latest_bdev
>>>    btrfs: free alien device due to device add
>>>
>>>   fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>>
>> One thing I'm not clear is how can we get into a situation of an alien
>> device. I.e devices should be in fs_devices iff they are part of the>
>> filesystem, no ?
>>
> 
> I think you are missing the point that, when the devices (of a
> raid1/raid5/raid6) are unmounted, we don't free any of their
> fs_devices::device. So in this situation if one of those devices is
> added to any another fsid (using btrfs device add) or wiped using wipefs
> -a, we still don't free the device's former fs_devices::device entry in
> the kernel and it acts as an alien device among its former partners when
> it is mounting.

So it could happen only due to a deliberate action by the user
and not during normal operation. In this case is it not the user's
responsibility to remove/forget the device from that file system?




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux