On 1/30/20 2:34 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 02:18:52PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 1/23/20 6:17 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >>> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> If sb_rootino doesn't point to where we think mkfs should have allocated >>> the root directory, check to see if the alleged root directory actually >>> looks like a root directory. If so, we'll let it live because someone >>> could have changed sunit since formatting time, and that changes the >>> root directory inode estimate. >> >> I forget, is there an fstest for this? > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191218041831.GK12765@magnolia/ of course :) ... >>> + if (mp->m_sb.sb_rootino != rootino && has_plausible_rootdir(mp)) { >>> + do_warn( >>> +_("sb root inode value %" PRIu64 " inconsistent with alignment (expected %"PRIu64")\n"), >>> + mp->m_sb.sb_rootino, rootino); >> >> what would a user do with this warning? Is there any value in emitting it? >> >> Otherwise this looks good. > > I dunno -- on the one hand, I understand that nobody wants to deal with > the support calls that will erupt from that message. On the other hand, > it's an indication that this filesystem isn't /quite/ the way we > expected it to be, and that would be a helpful hint if you were > debugging some other weird problem with an xfs filesystem. > > What if this were a do_log()? how about something that's less indicative of a problem and more informational, "sb root inode validated in unaligned location possibly due to sunit change" -Eric
