On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 09:58:15AM -0700, Catherine Hoang wrote: > Quotas are not enforced on the id==0 dquot, so the quota code uses it > to store warning limits and timeouts. Having just dropped support for > warning limits, this field no longer has any meaning. Return -EINVAL > for this dquot id if the fieldmask has any of the QC_*_WARNS set. > > Signed-off-by: Catherine Hoang <catherine.hoang@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c > index e7f3ac60ebd9..bdbd5c83b08e 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c > @@ -290,6 +290,8 @@ xfs_qm_scall_setqlim( > return -EINVAL; > if ((newlim->d_fieldmask & XFS_QC_MASK) == 0) > return 0; > + if ((newlim->d_fieldmask & QC_WARNS_MASK) && id == 0) > + return -EINVAL; Why would we do this for only id == 0? This will still allow non-zero warning values to be written to dquots that have id != 0, but I'm not sure why we'd allow this given that the previous patch just removed all the warning limit checking? Which then makes me ask: why are we still reading the warning counts from on disk dquots and writing in-memory values back to dquots? Shouldn't xfs_dquot_to_disk() just write zeros to the warning fields now, and xfs_dquot_from_disk() elide reading the warning counts altogether? i.e. can we remove d_bwarns, d_iwarns and d_rtbwarns from the struct fs_disk_quota altogether now? Which then raises the question of whether copy_from_xfs_dqblk() and friends should still support warn counts up in fs/quota/quota.c...? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
