On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 01:32:35PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> If a metadata IO error happens, we report the location of the failed IO
> request in units of daddrs. However, the printk message misleads people
> into thinking that the units are fs blocks, so fix the reported units.
>
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2: fix more messages
A useful cleanup...
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 13 +++++++------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> index 1981ef7..641b823 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
> @@ -585,8 +585,8 @@ _xfs_buf_find(
> * returning a specific error on buffer lookup failures.
> */
> xfs_alert(btp->bt_mount,
> - "%s: Block out of range: block 0x%llx, EOFS 0x%llx ",
> - __func__, cmap.bm_bn, eofs);
> + "%pS: daddr 0x%llx out of range, EOFS 0x%llx",
> + __return_address, cmap.bm_bn, eofs);
That return address won't tell us anything useful - it'll almost
always be xfs_buf_get_map(). That's why I used __func__ originally
here, and the code hasn't really changed since I did that....
> WARN_ON(1);
> return NULL;
> }
> @@ -1196,8 +1196,9 @@ xfs_buf_ioerror_alert(
> const char *func)
> {
> xfs_alert(bp->b_target->bt_mount,
> -"metadata I/O error: block 0x%llx (\"%s\") error %d numblks %d",
> - (uint64_t)XFS_BUF_ADDR(bp), func, -bp->b_error, bp->b_length);
> +"metadata I/O error in %pS (\"%s\") at daddr 0x%llx len %d error %d",
> + __return_address, func, (uint64_t)XFS_BUF_ADDR(bp),
> + bp->b_length, -bp->b_error);
> }
Same here - the return address is basically going to tell us exactly
the same information as the func parameter that is passed in.
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
