On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 07:05:30PM +0800, Hou Tao wrote: > If the data/attr fork log operations of an inode log item are splitted to > the next log record, xfs_logprint doesn't check the remaining log operations > in current log record and still tries to print these log operations which > don't exist in the log record. The content of these log operations will be > incorrect, or worse xfs_logprint will trigger a segment-fault and exit. > > xfs_logprint also doesn't calculate the count of the splitted log operations > correctly. It just returns 1 when the current log operation is splitted to > the next log record. It needs to consider the log operations behind. > > Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- A couple minor things.. First, could you please update the commit log as noted in my last reply to v1? > logprint/log_misc.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > v2: > - rewrite the commit message to clarify the patch > - use "skip_count" suggested by Brian Foster > - fix the indentation > > v1: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg03430.html > > diff --git a/logprint/log_misc.c b/logprint/log_misc.c > index a0f1766..4fa0ce1 100644 > --- a/logprint/log_misc.c > +++ b/logprint/log_misc.c ... > @@ -644,7 +649,8 @@ xlog_print_trans_inode( > } > *ptr += be32_to_cpu(op_head->oh_len); > if (op_head->oh_flags & XLOG_CONTINUE_TRANS) > - return 1; > + return skip_count; > + skip_count--; > } > > return 0; Could we ASSERT(skip_count == 0) before we return here? Otherwise this looks Ok to me. Brian > -- > 2.5.0 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" 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-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
