On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 05:05:48PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 01:17:49PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 10:28:16PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Clear the needsrepair flag, since it's used to prevent mounting of an
> > > inconsistent filesystem.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > repair/agheader.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> > >
> > >
> > > diff --git a/repair/agheader.c b/repair/agheader.c
> > > index 8bb99489..f6174dbf 100644
> > > --- a/repair/agheader.c
> > > +++ b/repair/agheader.c
> > > @@ -452,6 +452,17 @@ secondary_sb_whack(
> > > rval |= XR_AG_SB_SEC;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + if (xfs_sb_version_needsrepair(sb)) {
> > > + if (!no_modify)
> > > + sb->sb_features_incompat &=
> > > + ~XFS_SB_FEAT_INCOMPAT_NEEDSREPAIR;
> > > + if (!do_bzero) {
> > > + rval |= XR_AG_SB;
> > > + do_warn(_("needsrepair flag set in sb %d\n"), i);
> > > + } else
> > > + rval |= XR_AG_SB_SEC;
> > > + }
> > > +
> >
> > Looks reasonable modulo the questions on the previous patch. When I give
> > this a test, one thing that stands out is that the needsrepair state
> > itself sort of presents as corruption. I.e.,
> >
> > # ./db/xfs_db -x -c "version needsrepair" <dev>
> > Upgrading V5 filesystem
> > Upgraded V5 filesystem. Please run xfs_repair.
> > versionnum [0xb4a5+0x18a] =
> > V5,NLINK,DIRV2,ALIGN,LOGV2,EXTFLG,MOREBITS,ATTR2,LAZYSBCOUNT,PROJID32BIT,CRC,FTYPE,FINOBT,SPARSE_INODES,REFLINK,NEEDSREPAIR
> > # ./repair/xfs_repair <dev>
> > Phase 1 - find and verify superblock...
> > Phase 2 - using internal log
> > - zero log...
> > - scan filesystem freespace and inode maps...
> > needsrepair flag set in sb 1
> > reset bad sb for ag 1
> > needsrepair flag set in sb 2
> > reset bad sb for ag 2
> > needsrepair flag set in sb 0
> > reset bad sb for ag 0
> > needsrepair flag set in sb 3
> > reset bad sb for ag 3
> > - found root inode chunk
> > Phase 3 - for each AG...
> > ...
> >
> > So nothing was ever done to this fs besides set and clear the bit. Not a
> > huge deal, but I wonder if we should print something more user friendly
> > to indicate that repair found and cleared the needsrepair state, or at
> > least just avoid the "reset bad sb ..." message for the needsrepair
> > case.
>
> Hm. For the backup supers I guess there's really not much point in
> saying anything about the bit being set, because the only time they get
> used is when repair tries to use one to fix a filesystem.
>
> As for AG 0, I guess I could change that to say:
>
> dbprintf(_("Thank you for running xfs_repair!"));
>
> :D Or maybe there's no need to say anything at all.
>
Heh. FWIW, the "needsrepair flag set ..." messages didn't seem as
alarming as the "reset bad sb ..." ones, but that's just me. I'd be fine
with making this entirely silent too, or at least starting that way
until some user complains with a good enough reason for a new message..
;)
Brian
> --D
>
> > Brian
> >
> > > return(rval);
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> >
>
