On 10/30/18 6:20 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I noticed phase 4 writing back lots of inode buffers during recent
> testing. The recent rework of clear_inode() in commit 0724d0f4cb53
> ("xfs_repair: clear_dinode should simply clear, not check contents")
> accidentally caught a call to clear_inode_unlinked() as well,
> resulting in all inodes being marked dirty whether then needed
> updating or not.
>
> Fix it by reverting the erroneous hunk and adding warnings so taht
> this corruption is no longer silently fixed.
I find it confusing that "clear_dinode_unlinked" may or may not clear
unlinked. Can we change it to actually do as it's named, and move the
test to the (one) caller where it's needed, something like:
===
repair: don't dirty inodes unconditionally when testing unlinked state
Dave noticed phase 4 writing back lots of inode buffers during recent
testing. The recent rework of clear_inode() in commit 0724d0f4cb53
("xfs_repair: clear_dinode should simply clear, not check contents")
accidentally caught a call to clear_inode_unlinked() as well,
resulting in all inodes being marked dirty whether then needed
updating or not.
Fix it by making clear_inode_unlinked unconditionally do the clear
(as was done for clear_inode), and move the test to the caller.
Add warnings as well so that this corruption is no longer silently
fixed.
Reported-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
(I can keep Dave's SOB if preferred with a [sandeen: do it different]
tag if this looks ok and that approach is preferred)
(this also fixes unlinked_next lysdexia in the warnings)
diff --git a/repair/dinode.c b/repair/dinode.c
index 379f85c..c0fa3df 100644
--- a/repair/dinode.c
+++ b/repair/dinode.c
@@ -125,23 +125,16 @@ clear_dinode_core(struct xfs_mount *mp, xfs_dinode_t *dinoc, xfs_ino_t ino_num)
return;
}
-static int
+static void
clear_dinode_unlinked(xfs_mount_t *mp, xfs_dinode_t *dino)
{
- if (be32_to_cpu(dino->di_next_unlinked) != NULLAGINO) {
- if (!no_modify)
- dino->di_next_unlinked = cpu_to_be32(NULLAGINO);
- return(1);
- }
-
- return(0);
+ dino->di_next_unlinked = cpu_to_be32(NULLAGINO);
}
/*
* this clears the unlinked list too so it should not be called
* until after the agi unlinked lists are walked in phase 3.
- * returns > zero if the inode has been altered while being cleared
*/
static void
clear_dinode(xfs_mount_t *mp, xfs_dinode_t *dino, xfs_ino_t ino_num)
@@ -2675,9 +2668,16 @@ _("bad (negative) size %" PRId64 " on inode %" PRIu64 "\n"),
* we're going to find. check_dups is set to 1 only during
* phase 4. Ugly.
*/
- if (check_dups && !no_modify) {
- clear_dinode_unlinked(mp, dino);
- *dirty += 1;
+ if (check_dups && be32_to_cpu(dino->di_next_unlinked) != NULLAGINO) {
+ if (no_modify) {
+ do_warn(
+ _("Would clear next_unlinked in inode %" PRIu64 "\n"), lino);
+ } else {
+ clear_dinode_unlinked(mp, dino);
+ do_warn(
+ _("Cleared next_unlinked in inode %" PRIu64 "\n"), lino);
+ *dirty += 1;
+ }
}
/* set type and map type info */
