On 11/18/2019 09:38 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
Even though -o ro/-o read_only/--read-only options are very old, we
have never really treated them seriously (on par with snapshots). As
a first step, fail writes to images mapped read-only just like we do
for snapshots.
We need this check in rbd because the block layer basically ignores
read-only setting, see commit a32e236eb93e ("Partially revert "block:
fail op_is_write() requests to read-only partitions"").
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/block/rbd.c | 13 ++++++++-----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/rbd.c b/drivers/block/rbd.c
index 330d2789f373..842b92ef2c06 100644
--- a/drivers/block/rbd.c
+++ b/drivers/block/rbd.c
@@ -4820,11 +4820,14 @@ static void rbd_queue_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
goto err_rq;
}
- if (op_type != OBJ_OP_READ && rbd_is_snap(rbd_dev)) {
- rbd_warn(rbd_dev, "%s on read-only snapshot",
- obj_op_name(op_type));
- result = -EIO;
- goto err;
+ if (op_type != OBJ_OP_READ) {
+ if (rbd_is_ro(rbd_dev)) {
+ rbd_warn(rbd_dev, "%s on read-only mapping",
+ obj_op_name(op_type));
+ result = -EIO;
+ goto err;
+ }
+ rbd_assert(!rbd_is_snap(rbd_dev));
Just one question here, if block layer does not prevent write for
readonly disk 100%,
should we make it rbd-level readonly in rbd_ioctl_set_ro() when requested ?
Thanx
}
/*
