On 2019/4/6 下午2:20, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 6.04.19 г. 8:05 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: >> >> >> On 2019/4/6 下午12:50, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 11:14:26AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>>> Since we're going to support write time tree checker, it's possible that >>>> transaction get aborted due to tree-checker, also due to new >>>> BLK_STS_SELFTEST bit, we can distinguish real EIO error and EUCLEAN >>>> error. >>>> >>>> Now add error string for EUCLEAN too. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> fs/btrfs/super.c | 3 +++ >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c >>>> index 120e4340792a..a4cbbd7861d3 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/super.c >>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c >>>> @@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ const char *btrfs_decode_error(int errno) >>>> case -ENOENT: >>>> errstr = "No such entry"; >>>> break; >>>> + case -EUCLEAN: >>>> + errstr = "Selftest failure"; >>>> + break; >>> >>> EUCLEAN usually spits out "Structure needs cleaning" in userspace (and >>> ext4 & xfs have been using it for years to complain about corrupt data), >>> so why diverge here? >> >> Because the original "structure needs cleaning" doesn't really show the >> meaning we're using. > > On the contrary, structure needs cleaning means the filesystem has > detected a consistency error. How that detection has happened shouldn't > burden the user, the important fact is it has. Selftest is somewhat > cryptic, I'd suggest at least "verification error" or just go with > canonical "Structure needs cleaning". OK, I'll go that way. Thanks for the hint, Qu > >> >> We really means, something wrong happened, thus I prefer something like >> selftest failure. >> >> And, the idea of adding -EUCLEAN, is to replace the original "unknown" >> output, if you're sticking with the original error string, we still need >> that branch. >> >>> >>> Wait... does "tree-checker" mean online metadata checking, and 'selftest >>> failure' is what gets spit out when it finds some metadata it doesn't >>> like? >> >> Yep. >> >> Thanks, >> Qu >> >>> >>> --D >>> >>>> } >>>> >>>> return errstr; >>>> -- >>>> 2.21.0 >>>> >>
