On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 10:15:29AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 05:22:05PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 03:59:25PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Expose all metadata structure buffer verifier functions via buf_ops.
> > > These will be used by the online scrub mechanism to look for problems
> > > with buffers that are already sitting around in memory.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > ....
> > > @@ -2468,7 +2478,7 @@ xfs_agf_read_verify(
> > > .verify_write = xfs_attr3_leaf_write_verify,
> > > + .verify_struct = xfs_attr3_leaf_verify,
> > > };
> > >
> > > int
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_remote.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_remote.c
> > > index d4d2902..1be995b 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_remote.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_remote.c
> > > @@ -204,10 +204,42 @@ xfs_attr3_rmt_write_verify(
> > > ASSERT(len == 0);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static xfs_failaddr_t
> > > +xfs_attr3_rmt_verify_struct(
> > > + struct xfs_buf *bp)
> > > +{
> > > + struct xfs_mount *mp = bp->b_target->bt_mount;
> > > + char *ptr;
> > > + void *failed_at;
> > > + int len;
> > > + xfs_daddr_t bno;
> > > + int blksize = mp->m_attr_geo->blksize;
> > > +
> > > + /* no verification of non-crc buffers */
> > > + if (!xfs_sb_version_hascrc(&mp->m_sb))
> > > + return NULL;
> > > +
> > > + ptr = bp->b_addr;
> > > + bno = bp->b_bn;
> > > + len = BBTOB(bp->b_length);
> > > + ASSERT(len >= blksize);
> > > +
> > > + while (len > 0) {
> > > + if ((failed_at = xfs_attr3_rmt_verify(mp, ptr, blksize, bno)))
> > > + return failed_at;
> > > + len -= blksize;
> > > + ptr += blksize;
> > > + bno += BTOBB(blksize);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return NULL;
> > > +}
> >
> > I'd much prefer to see this combined with
> > xfs_attr3_rmt_read_verify() rather than having another copy of this
> > iteration code. They really only vary by whether the CRC is checked
> > in the loop....
> >
> > ....
> >
> > > +static xfs_failaddr_t
> > > +xfs_dquot_buf_verify_struct(
> > > + struct xfs_buf *bp)
> > > +{
> > > + struct xfs_mount *mp = bp->b_target->bt_mount;
> > > +
> > > + if (!xfs_dquot_buf_verify(mp, bp, 0))
> > > + return __this_address;
> > > + return NULL;
> > > +}
> >
> > I can't remember what happened exactly with dquot buffers earlire in
> > the patchset, but why isn't it returning a failaddr like all the
> > other structure verifiers?
>
> The dquot verifiers are sufficiently different from everything else
> (verbose error reporting, some ability to zap garbage data) that I was
> going to send that as a separate cleanup series.
>
> I /think/ the solution is to disentangle xfs_dqcheck into a separate
> check routine that returns xfs_failaddr_t like everything else (at a
> cost of the removal of all the xfs_alert calls) so that the error
> reports become "xfs: quota buffer XXX error at xfs_dqcheck+0x74" like
> everything else. The caller becomes directly responsible for printing a
> warning message (instead of XFS_QMOPT_DOWARN).
>
> Then, the quota repair piece becomes a separate function which the
> XFS_QMOPT_DQREPAIR callers can call directly.
>
> Sound good?
Yes, seems like a reasonable cleanup to make. Making the dquot code
have fewer special snowflakes is always a good idea :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
