4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Anand Jain <Anand.Jain@xxxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 6f794e3c5c8f8fdd3b5bb20d9ded894e685b5bbe ]
It appears from the original commit [1] that there isn't any design
specific reason not to fail the mount instead of just warning. This
patch will change it to fail.
[1]
commit 319e4d0661e5323c9f9945f0f8fb5905e5fe74c3
btrfs: Enhance super validation check
Fixes: 319e4d0661e5323 ("btrfs: Enhance super validation check")
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
@@ -4142,9 +4142,11 @@ static int btrfs_check_super_valid(struc
btrfs_err(fs_info, "no valid FS found");
ret = -EINVAL;
}
- if (btrfs_super_flags(sb) & ~BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_SUPP)
- btrfs_warn(fs_info, "unrecognized super flag: %llu",
+ if (btrfs_super_flags(sb) & ~BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_SUPP) {
+ btrfs_err(fs_info, "unrecognized or unsupported super flag: %llu",
btrfs_super_flags(sb) & ~BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_SUPP);
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ }
if (btrfs_super_root_level(sb) >= BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL) {
btrfs_err(fs_info, "tree_root level too big: %d >= %d",
btrfs_super_root_level(sb), BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL);
