On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 03:07:25PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Improve the checking at the start of a realtime grow operation so that > we avoid accidentally set a new extent size that is too large and avoid > adding an rt volume to a filesystem with rmap or reflink because we > don't support rt rmap or reflink yet. > > While we're at it, separate the checks so that we're only testing one > aspect at a time. > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > index 4e7be6b4ca8e..8920bce4fb0a 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > @@ -928,11 +928,23 @@ xfs_growfs_rt( > */ > if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) > return -EPERM; > - if (mp->m_rtdev_targp == NULL || mp->m_rbmip == NULL || > - (nrblocks = in->newblocks) <= sbp->sb_rblocks || > - (sbp->sb_rblocks && (in->extsize != sbp->sb_rextsize))) > + if (mp->m_rtdev_targp == NULL || !mp->m_rbmip || !mp->m_rsumip) > return -EINVAL; Shouldn't this use XFS_IS_REALTIME_MOUNT() so it always fails if CONFIG_XFS_RT=n? i.e. if we have to check mp->m_rbmip and mp->m_rsumip to determine if this mount is realtime enabled, then doesn't XFS_IS_REALTIME_MOUNT() need to be fixed? > - if ((error = xfs_sb_validate_fsb_count(sbp, nrblocks))) > + if (in->newblocks <= sbp->sb_rblocks) > + return -EINVAL; > + if (xfs_sb_version_hasrealtime(&mp->m_sb) && > + in->extsize != sbp->sb_rextsize) > + return -EINVAL; xfs_sb_version_hasrealtime() checks "sbp->sb_rblocks > 0", it's not an actual version flag check. I think this makes much more sense being open coded rather than masquerading as a feature check.... > + if (XFS_FSB_TO_B(mp, in->extsize) > XFS_MAX_RTEXTSIZE || > + XFS_FSB_TO_B(mp, in->extsize) < XFS_MIN_RTEXTSIZE) > + return -EINVAL; > + if (xfs_sb_version_hasrmapbt(&mp->m_sb) || > + xfs_sb_version_hasreflink(&mp->m_sb)) > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + > + nrblocks = in->newblocks; > + error = xfs_sb_validate_fsb_count(sbp, nrblocks); > + if (error) > return error; Otherwise looks like a reasonable set of additional checks. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
