On 6/29/17 5:34 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 10/5/16 12:04 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote: >> Commit 6dfe5a049f2 (xfs: xfs_attr_inactive leaves inconsistent >> attr fork state behind) fixed an issue where an inconsistent >> attr fork count persisted on disk if there was concurrent inode >> writeback happening after the inode was evicted from the VFS layer. >> >> If one of those inodes landed on disk and was reused, it may have >> an invalid di_forkoff, which can cause problems when trying to add >> new extended attributes. Since we clear the rest of the attribute >> fork values on ialloc, let's clear di_forkoff as well and ensure the >> invalid value won't be encountered. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@xxxxxxxx> > > This makes sense to me, but seems to have gotten lost. > > It'd need to go to libxfs_ialloc as well if it makes the kernel. > > Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> Meh, I missed Dave's "it's fine but it shouldn't matter" reply, sorry. Still, seems like it's not a bad idea to initialize this along with everything else. >> --- >> fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c >> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c >> @@ -835,6 +835,7 @@ xfs_ialloc( >> */ >> ip->i_d.di_aformat = XFS_DINODE_FMT_EXTENTS; >> ip->i_d.di_anextents = 0; >> + ip->i_d.di_forkoff = 0; >> >> /* >> * Log the new values stuffed into the inode. >> > -- > 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
