On 9/25/19 4:36 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Use different functions to warn about media errors that were detected
> underlying xattr data because logical offsets for attribute fork extents
> have no meaning to users.
>
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> scrub/phase6.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
>
> diff --git a/scrub/phase6.c b/scrub/phase6.c
> index 4554af9a..1edd98af 100644
> --- a/scrub/phase6.c
> +++ b/scrub/phase6.c
> @@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ xfs_decode_special_owner(
>
> /* Report if this extent overlaps a bad region. */
> static bool
> -xfs_report_verify_inode_bmap(
> +report_data_loss(
> struct scrub_ctx *ctx,
> const char *descr,
> int fd,
> @@ -142,6 +142,40 @@ _("offset %llu failed read verification."), bmap->bm_offset);
> return true;
> }
>
> +/* Report if the extended attribute data overlaps a bad region. */
I'd like to see a comment above the typedef for this function
(eventually scrub_bmap_iter_fn), or above the function which uses it
(scrub_iterate_filemaps) in order to explain what the return
values mean and the implication for scanning.
Looking at this w/o a lot of context,
"Report if the extended attribute data overlaps a bad region."
and nothing but "return true" seems ... odd. I think what it means
is "print something if found ... and set an error for some problems,
but always continue scanning?"
> +static bool
> +report_attr_loss(
> + struct scrub_ctx *ctx,
> + const char *descr,
> + int fd,
> + int whichfork,
> + struct fsxattr *fsx,
> + struct xfs_bmap *bmap,
> + void *arg)
> +{
> + struct media_verify_state *vs = arg;
> + struct bitmap *bmp = vs->d_bad;
> +
> + /* Complain about attr fork extents that don't look right. */
> + if (bmap->bm_flags & (BMV_OF_PREALLOC | BMV_OF_DELALLOC)) {
> + str_info(ctx, descr,
> +_("found unexpected unwritten/delalloc attr fork extent."));
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> + if (fsx->fsx_xflags & FS_XFLAG_REALTIME) {
> + str_info(ctx, descr,
> +_("found unexpected realtime attr fork extent."));
> + return true;
> + }
so these don't flag any error, and moveon stays true, but
> +
> + if (bitmap_test(bmp, bmap->bm_physical, bmap->bm_length))
> + str_error(ctx, descr,
> +_("media error in extended attribute data."));
this actually counts as an error? OTOH report_data_loss() seems to return
false if it finds something like this, so I'm a little confused about the
difference and the behavior. Help?
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /* Iterate the extent mappings of a file to report errors. */
> static bool
> xfs_report_verify_fd(
> @@ -155,16 +189,13 @@ xfs_report_verify_fd(
>
> /* data fork */
> moveon = xfs_iterate_filemaps(ctx, descr, fd, XFS_DATA_FORK, &key,
> - xfs_report_verify_inode_bmap, arg);
> + report_data_loss, arg);
> if (!moveon)
> return false;
>
> /* attr fork */
> - moveon = xfs_iterate_filemaps(ctx, descr, fd, XFS_ATTR_FORK, &key,
> - xfs_report_verify_inode_bmap, arg);
> - if (!moveon)
> - return false;
> - return true;
> + return xfs_iterate_filemaps(ctx, descr, fd, XFS_ATTR_FORK, &key,
> + report_attr_loss, arg);
> }
>
> /* Report read verify errors in unlinked (but still open) files. */
>
