On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 03:56:26PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> A few minor comments below
>
> On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 11:15:51AM -0700, Liu Bo wrote:
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> > @@ -6206,27 +6206,23 @@ struct btrfs_device *btrfs_alloc_device(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
> > return dev;
> > }
> >
> > -static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_key *key,
> > - struct extent_buffer *leaf,
> > - struct btrfs_chunk *chunk)
> > +/* Return -EIO if any error, otherwise return 0. */
> > +static int btrfs_check_chunk_valid(struct btrfs_root *root,
> > + struct extent_buffer *leaf,
> > + struct btrfs_chunk *chunk, u64 logical)
> > {
> > - struct btrfs_mapping_tree *map_tree = &root->fs_info->mapping_tree;
> > - struct map_lookup *map;
> > - struct extent_map *em;
> > - u64 logical;
> > u64 length;
> > u64 stripe_len;
> > - u64 devid;
> > - u8 uuid[BTRFS_UUID_SIZE];
> > - int num_stripes;
> > - int ret;
> > - int i;
> > + u16 num_stripes;
> > + u16 sub_stripes;
> > + u64 type;
> >
> > - logical = key->offset;
> > length = btrfs_chunk_length(leaf, chunk);
> > stripe_len = btrfs_chunk_stripe_len(leaf, chunk);
> > num_stripes = btrfs_chunk_num_stripes(leaf, chunk);
> > - /* Validation check */
> > + sub_stripes = btrfs_chunk_sub_stripes(leaf, chunk);
> > + type = btrfs_chunk_type(leaf, chunk);
> > +
> > if (!num_stripes) {
> > btrfs_err(root->fs_info, "invalid chunk num_stripes: %u",
> > num_stripes);
> > @@ -6237,24 +6233,70 @@ static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_key *key,
> > "invalid chunk logical %llu", logical);
> > return -EIO;
> > }
> > + if (btrfs_chunk_sector_size(leaf, chunk) != root->sectorsize) {
> > + btrfs_err(root->fs_info, "invalid chunk sectorsize %llu",
> > + (unsigned long long)btrfs_chunk_sector_size(leaf,
>
> type cast not necessry
>
> > + chunk));
> > + return -EIO;
> > + }
> > if (!length || !IS_ALIGNED(length, root->sectorsize)) {
> > btrfs_err(root->fs_info,
> > "invalid chunk length %llu", length);
> > return -EIO;
> > }
> > - if (!is_power_of_2(stripe_len)) {
> > + if (stripe_len != BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN) {
>
> Again too strict. As mentined elsewhere, add a helper to validate
> stripe_len and use it so we don't open-code it.
I'm not sure I understand the comment about open-code, right now
the value must be BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN and we don't set any other value,
are we going to add a helper for just (stripe_len != BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN)?
I fixed other issues.
Thanks,
-liubo
>
> > btrfs_err(root->fs_info, "invalid chunk stripe length: %llu",
> > stripe_len);
> > return -EIO;
> > }
> > if (~(BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_TYPE_MASK | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) &
> > - btrfs_chunk_type(leaf, chunk)) {
> > + type) {
> > btrfs_err(root->fs_info, "unrecognized chunk type: %llu",
> > ~(BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_TYPE_MASK |
> > BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) &
> > btrfs_chunk_type(leaf, chunk));
> > return -EIO;
> > }
> > + if ((type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10 && sub_stripes == 0) ||
> > + (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 && num_stripes < 1) ||
> > + (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 && num_stripes < 2) ||
> > + (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID5 && num_stripes < 3) ||
> > + (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP && num_stripes > 2) ||
> > + ((type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) == 0 &&
>
> I was looking if we could turn that into some generic checks using the
> btrfs_raid_array but seems that the tests do not make a uniform pattern,
> eg the DUP and SINGLE disguised as "mask == 0". As we don't add new
> profiles too often I'm ok with that version.
>
> > + num_stripes != 1)) {
> > + btrfs_err(root->fs_info, "Invalid num_stripes:sub_stripes %u:%u for profile %llu",
>
> "invalid..." (no initial capital letter) and put the string on the next
> line so it does not exceed 80 cols
>
> > + num_stripes, sub_stripes,
> > + type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK);
> > + return -EIO;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_key *key,
> > + struct extent_buffer *leaf,
> > + struct btrfs_chunk *chunk)
> > +{
> > + struct btrfs_mapping_tree *map_tree = &root->fs_info->mapping_tree;
> > + struct map_lookup *map;
> > + struct extent_map *em;
> > + u64 logical;
> > + u64 length;
> > + u64 stripe_len;
> > + u64 devid;
> > + u8 uuid[BTRFS_UUID_SIZE];
> > + int num_stripes;
> > + int ret;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + logical = key->offset;
> > + length = btrfs_chunk_length(leaf, chunk);
> > + stripe_len = btrfs_chunk_stripe_len(leaf, chunk);
> > + num_stripes = btrfs_chunk_num_stripes(leaf, chunk);
> > + /* Validation check */
>
> Redundant comment (from the time when the validation was not in a
> wrapper)
>
> > + ret = btrfs_check_chunk_valid(root, leaf, chunk, logical);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> >
> > read_lock(&map_tree->map_tree.lock);
> > em = lookup_extent_mapping(&map_tree->map_tree, logical, 1);
> > @@ -6502,6 +6544,7 @@ int btrfs_read_sys_array(struct btrfs_root *root)
> > u32 array_size;
> > u32 len = 0;
> > u32 cur_offset;
> > + u64 type;
> > struct btrfs_key key;
> >
> > ASSERT(BTRFS_SUPER_INFO_SIZE <= root->nodesize);
> > @@ -6568,6 +6611,15 @@ int btrfs_read_sys_array(struct btrfs_root *root)
> > break;
> > }
> >
> > + type = btrfs_chunk_type(sb, chunk);
> > + if ((type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM) == 0) {
> > + printk(KERN_ERR
> > + "BTRFS: invalid chunk type %llu in sys_array at offset %u\n",
> > + type, cur_offset);
> > + ret = -EIO;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > len = btrfs_chunk_item_size(num_stripes);
> > if (cur_offset + len > array_size)
> > goto out_short_read;
> > --
> > 2.5.5
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
