Skip to content

K
Kernel

openeuler / Kernel
大约 1 年 前同步成功

通知 5
Star 0
Fork 0
K
Kernel

体验新版 GitCode，发现更多精彩内容 >>

切换分支/标签
  1. 09 9月, 2019 2 次提交
  3. 01 7月, 2019 1 次提交
    • Q
      btrfs: tree-checker: Check if the file extent end overflows · 4c094c33
      由 Qu Wenruo 提交于 
      Under certain conditions, we could have strange file extent item in log
tree like:

  item 18 key (69599 108 397312) itemoff 15208 itemsize 53
	extent data disk bytenr 0 nr 0
	extent data offset 0 nr 18446744073709547520 ram 18446744073709547520

The num_bytes + ram_bytes overflow 64 bit type.

For num_bytes part, we can detect such overflow along with file offset
(key->offset), as file_offset + num_bytes should never go beyond u64.

For ram_bytes part, it's about the decompressed size of the extent, not
directly related to the size.
In theory it is OK to have a large value, and put extra limitation
on RAM bytes may cause unexpected false alerts.

So in tree-checker, we only check if the file offset and num bytes
overflow.
Signed-off-by: NQu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      4c094c33
  5. 16 5月, 2019 1 次提交
  7. 30 4月, 2019 28 次提交
  9. 17 12月, 2018 1 次提交
  11. 04 12月, 2018 1 次提交
    • Q
      btrfs: tree-checker: Don't check max block group size as current max chunk size limit is unreliable · 10950929
      由 Qu Wenruo 提交于 
      [BUG]
A completely valid btrfs will refuse to mount, with error message like:
  BTRFS critical (device sdb2): corrupt leaf: root=2 block=239681536 slot=172 \
    bg_start=12018974720 bg_len=10888413184, invalid block group size, \
    have 10888413184 expect (0, 10737418240]

This has been reported several times as the 4.19 kernel is now being
used. The filesystem refuses to mount, but is otherwise ok and booting
4.18 is a workaround.

Btrfs check returns no error, and all kernels used on this fs is later
than 2011, which should all have the 10G size limit commit.

[CAUSE]
For a 12 devices btrfs, we could allocate a chunk larger than 10G due to
stripe stripe bump up.

__btrfs_alloc_chunk()
|- max_stripe_size = 1G
|- max_chunk_size = 10G
|- data_stripe = 11
|- if (1G * 11 > 10G) {
       stripe_size = 976128930;
       stripe_size = round_up(976128930, SZ_16M) = 989855744

However the final stripe_size (989855744) * 11 = 10888413184, which is
still larger than 10G.

[FIX]
For the comprehensive check, we need to do the full check at chunk read
time, and rely on bg <-> chunk mapping to do the check.

We could just skip the length check for now.

Fixes: fce466ea ("btrfs: tree-checker: Verify block_group_item")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.19+
Reported-by: NWang Yugui <wangyugui@e16-tech.com>
Signed-off-by: NQu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      10950929
  13. 06 11月, 2018 1 次提交
  15. 15 10月, 2018 1 次提交
  17. 06 8月, 2018 2 次提交
  19. 12 4月, 2018 1 次提交
  21. 26 3月, 2018 1 次提交
    • D
      btrfs: add more __cold annotations · e67c718b
      由 David Sterba 提交于 
      The __cold functions are placed to a special section, as they're
expected to be called rarely. This could help i-cache prefetches or help
compiler to decide which branches are more/less likely to be taken
without any other annotations needed.

Though we can't add more __exit annotations, it's still possible to add
__cold (that's also added with __exit). That way the following function
categories are tagged:

- printf wrappers, error messages
- exit helpers
Signed-off-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
      e67c718b