On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 08:02:54AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Currently the calls to xfs_iext_count_may_overflow and
> xfs_iext_count_upgrade are always paired. Merge them into a single
> function to simplify the callers and the actual check and upgrade
> logic itself.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c | 5 +--
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 5 +--
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++------------------
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.h | 4 +--
> fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_item.c | 4 +--
> fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c | 24 +++----------
> fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c | 5 +--
> fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c | 9 ++---
> fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c | 9 ++---
> fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c | 5 +--
> 10 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-)
....
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.c
> index 7d660a9739090a..235c41eca5edd7 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_inode_fork.c
> @@ -765,53 +765,49 @@ xfs_ifork_verify_local_attr(
> return 0;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Check if the inode fork supports adding nr_to_add more extents.
> + *
> + * If it doesn't but we can upgrade it to large extent counters, do the upgrade.
> + * If we can't upgrade or are already using big counters but still can't fit the
> + * additional extents, return -EFBIG.
> + */
> int
> -xfs_iext_count_may_overflow(
> +xfs_iext_count_upgrade(
> + struct xfs_trans *tp,
> struct xfs_inode *ip,
> int whichfork,
> - int nr_to_add)
> + uint nr_to_add)
> {
> + struct xfs_mount *mp = ip->i_mount;
> + bool has_large =
> + xfs_inode_has_large_extent_counts(ip);
> struct xfs_ifork *ifp = xfs_ifork_ptr(ip, whichfork);
> uint64_t max_exts;
> uint64_t nr_exts;
>
> + ASSERT(nr_to_add <= XFS_MAX_EXTCNT_UPGRADE_NR);
> +
> if (whichfork == XFS_COW_FORK)
> return 0;
>
> - max_exts = xfs_iext_max_nextents(xfs_inode_has_large_extent_counts(ip),
> - whichfork);
> -
> - if (XFS_TEST_ERROR(false, ip->i_mount, XFS_ERRTAG_REDUCE_MAX_IEXTENTS))
> - max_exts = 10;
> -
> nr_exts = ifp->if_nextents + nr_to_add;
> - if (nr_exts < ifp->if_nextents || nr_exts > max_exts)
> + if (nr_exts < ifp->if_nextents) {
> + /* no point in upgrading if if_nextents overflows */
> return -EFBIG;
> + }
>
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> -/*
> - * Upgrade this inode's extent counter fields to be able to handle a potential
> - * increase in the extent count by nr_to_add. Normally this is the same
> - * quantity that caused xfs_iext_count_may_overflow() to return -EFBIG.
> - */
> -int
> -xfs_iext_count_upgrade(
> - struct xfs_trans *tp,
> - struct xfs_inode *ip,
> - uint nr_to_add)
> -{
> - ASSERT(nr_to_add <= XFS_MAX_EXTCNT_UPGRADE_NR);
> -
> - if (!xfs_has_large_extent_counts(ip->i_mount) ||
> - xfs_inode_has_large_extent_counts(ip) ||
> - XFS_TEST_ERROR(false, ip->i_mount, XFS_ERRTAG_REDUCE_MAX_IEXTENTS))
> - return -EFBIG;
> -
> - ip->i_diflags2 |= XFS_DIFLAG2_NREXT64;
> - xfs_trans_log_inode(tp, ip, XFS_ILOG_CORE);
> -
> + if (XFS_TEST_ERROR(false, mp, XFS_ERRTAG_REDUCE_MAX_IEXTENTS))
> + max_exts = 10;
> + else
> + max_exts = xfs_iext_max_nextents(has_large, whichfork);
> + if (nr_exts > max_exts) {
> + if (has_large || !xfs_has_large_extent_counts(mp) ||
> + XFS_TEST_ERROR(false, mp, XFS_ERRTAG_REDUCE_MAX_IEXTENTS))
> + return -EFBIG;
> + ip->i_diflags2 |= XFS_DIFLAG2_NREXT64;
> + xfs_trans_log_inode(tp, ip, XFS_ILOG_CORE);
> + }
IIUC, testing the error tag twice won't always give the same result.
I think this will be more reliable, and it self-documents the error
injection case better:
if (XFS_TEST_ERROR(false, ip->i_mount, XFS_ERRTAG_REDUCE_MAX_IEXTENTS) &&
nr_exts > 10))
return -EFBIG;
if (nr_exts > xfs_iext_max_nextents(has_large, whichfork)) {
if (has_large || !xfs_has_large_extent_counts(mp))
return -EFBIG;
ip->i_diflags2 |= XFS_DIFLAG2_NREXT64;
xfs_trans_log_inode(tp, ip, XFS_ILOG_CORE);
}
return 0;
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
