On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 03:02:45PM +0530, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 09:40:57AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 09:38:30AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 08:24:27PM +0530, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > > > > Extsize is allowed to be set on files with no data in it. For this, > > > > we were checking if the files have extents but missed to check if > > > > delayed extents were present. This patch adds that check. > > > > > > > > While we are at it, also refactor this check into a helper since > > > > its used in some other places as well like xfs_inactive() or > > > > xfs_ioctl_setattr_xflags() > > > > > > > > **Without the patch (SUCCEEDS)** > > > > > > > > $ xfs_io -c 'open -f testfile' -c 'pwrite 0 1024' -c 'extsize 65536' > > > > > > > > wrote 1024/1024 bytes at offset 0 > > > > 1 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0002 sec (4.628 MiB/sec and 4739.3365 ops/sec) > > > > > > > > **With the patch (FAILS as expected)** > > > > > > > > $ xfs_io -c 'open -f testfile' -c 'pwrite 0 1024' -c 'extsize 65536' > > > > > > > > wrote 1024/1024 bytes at offset 0 > > > > 1 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0002 sec (4.628 MiB/sec and 4739.3365 ops/sec) > > > > xfs_io: FS_IOC_FSSETXATTR testfile: Invalid argument > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Looks good now, > > > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > That said, could you add a fixes tag for the xfs_ioctl_setattr_* > > changes, please? > > Actually a small doubt Darrick regarding the Fixes commit (asked inline > below): > > > > > --D > > > > > --D > > > > > > > --- > > > > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 2 +- > > > > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h | 5 +++++ > > > > fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c | 4 ++-- > > > > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > > index bcc277fc0a83..19dcb569a3e7 100644 > > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > > @@ -1409,7 +1409,7 @@ xfs_inactive( > > > > > > > > if (S_ISREG(VFS_I(ip)->i_mode) && > > > > (ip->i_disk_size != 0 || XFS_ISIZE(ip) != 0 || > > > > - ip->i_df.if_nextents > 0 || ip->i_delayed_blks > 0)) > > > > + xfs_inode_has_filedata(ip))) > > > > truncate = 1; > > > > > > > > if (xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_IQUOTAUNCHECKED)) { > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h > > > > index 97ed912306fd..03944b6c5fba 100644 > > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h > > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h > > > > @@ -292,6 +292,11 @@ static inline bool xfs_is_cow_inode(struct xfs_inode *ip) > > > > return xfs_is_reflink_inode(ip) || xfs_is_always_cow_inode(ip); > > > > } > > > > > > > > +static inline bool xfs_inode_has_filedata(const struct xfs_inode *ip) > > > > +{ > > > > + return ip->i_df.if_nextents > 0 || ip->i_delayed_blks > 0; > > > > +} > > > > + > > > > /* > > > > * Check if an inode has any data in the COW fork. This might be often false > > > > * even for inodes with the reflink flag when there is no pending COW operation. > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c > > > > index a20d426ef021..2567fd2a0994 100644 > > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c > > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c > > > > @@ -481,7 +481,7 @@ xfs_ioctl_setattr_xflags( > > > > > > > > if (rtflag != XFS_IS_REALTIME_INODE(ip)) { > > > > /* Can't change realtime flag if any extents are allocated. */ > > > > - if (ip->i_df.if_nextents || ip->i_delayed_blks) > > > > + if (xfs_inode_has_filedata(ip)) > > > > return -EINVAL; > > > > > > > > /* > > > > @@ -602,7 +602,7 @@ xfs_ioctl_setattr_check_extsize( > > > > if (!fa->fsx_valid) > > > > return 0; > > > > > > > > - if (S_ISREG(VFS_I(ip)->i_mode) && ip->i_df.if_nextents && > > > > + if (S_ISREG(VFS_I(ip)->i_mode) && xfs_inode_has_filedata(ip) && > > So seems like there have been lots of changes to this particular line > mostly as a part of refactoring other areas but seems like the actual > commit that introduced it was: > > commit e94af02a9cd7b6590bec81df9d6ab857d6cf322f > Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Nov 2 15:10:41 2005 +1100 > > [XFS] fix old xfs_setattr mis-merge from irix; mostly harmless esp if not > using xfs rt > > Before this we were actually checking ip->i_delayed_blks correctly. So just wanted > to confirm that the fixes would have the above commit right? > > If this looks okay I'll send a revision with this above tags: > > Fixes: e94af02a9cd7 ("[XFS] fix old xfs_setattr mis-merge from irix; mostly harmless esp if not using xfs rt") Yeah, that sounds fine. Want to write a quick fstest to bang on xfs_ioctl_setattr_check_extsize to force everyone to backport it? :) --D > Thanks, > Ojaswin > > > > > XFS_FSB_TO_B(mp, ip->i_extsize) != fa->fsx_extsize) > > > > return -EINVAL; > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.43.5 > > > > > > > > > > > >