On Sun, Oct 08, 2017 at 10:10:55AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 10:00:44AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 01:51:23PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:42:36PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > + daddr >= info->eofs || > > > > + daddr + dlen > info->eofs) > > > > + xfs_scrub_fblock_set_corrupt(info->sc, info->whichfork, > > > > + irec->br_startoff); > > > > + > > > > + if (irec->br_state == XFS_EXT_UNWRITTEN && > > > > + !xfs_sb_version_hasextflgbit(&mp->m_sb)) > > > > > > Superblock scrubber should reject any filesystem without the > > > extflgbit as corrupt - it's always set by mkfs - so I'm not sure we > > > need to check this here. > > > > What happens if scrub encounters a v4 filesystem without EXTFLGBIT? > > We don't support such filesystems (user level stale data exposure > security risk), but we have allowed them to continue to mount > because such filesystems did exist in the past (*cough* SGI DMF > database partitions *cough*). I'd suggest scrub should say > filesystems without the flag are bad are too old to be scrubbed > correctly. Ok, works for me. > > The superblock scrubber only checks that the secondary superblocks are > > consistent (geometry-wise) with sb 0, and mount doesn't prohibit > > !EXTFLGBIT filesystems from mounting. fallocate and friends even work, > > albeit slower because we actually write zeroes to the disk in lieu of > > setting the unwritten flag, apparently. > > Unwritten extents were enabled by default in 2003, and the mkfs flag > was dropped completely in 2007. So no filesystem made in the past > ten years should have this set. > > > But, seeing as mkfs always sets EXTFLGBIT and v5 implies the feature > > even if the bit isn't set; and there's no way to turn off the feature > > bit (except unsupported things like xfs_db -x), are you suggesting that > > we should simply end support for mounting !EXTFLGBIT v4 filesystems? > > I wasn't suggesting that, but perhaps we should. Anyone want to send a patch to get people out of the woodwork? :) > > > > + > > > > +out_unlock: > > > > + return error; > > > > > > Hmmm - out_unlock doesn't unlock anything? > > > > Heh, it never does. Baaaaaaaaad label. (Fixed.) --D > :P > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > -- > 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
