From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> Cc: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity with enabled features in image Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 15:01:31 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <00726135-f210-7791-a372-ef9cb1ae209f@huawei.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190723013546.GA60778@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> On 2019/7/23 9:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 07/16, Chao Yu wrote: >> Hi Jaegeuk, >> >> On 2019/5/9 9:15, Chao Yu wrote: >>> On 2019/5/5 10:51, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> On 2019/5/1 11:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>> On 04/29, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>> On 2019-4-28 21:38, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>> On 04/24, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>> This patch fixes to do sanity with enabled features in image, if >>>>>>>> there are features kernel can not recognize, just fail the mount. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We need to figure out per-feature-based rejection, since some of them can >>>>>>> be set without layout change. >> >> What about adding one field in superblock for compatible features in future? >> >> sb.feature(F2FS_FEATURE_LAST, max] stores uncompatible features >> sb.compatible_feature stores compatible features >> >> If we follow above rule when adding one feature, then, we can fail the mount if >> sb.feature(F2FS_FEATURE_LAST, max] is valid. > > How about adding required_features flag in sb to check part of features only? You mean all incompatible features can be add into sb.required_features later like this? __le32 required_features; /* incompatible feature to old kernel */ And we can check required_features with supported features in current kernel? if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) & (~NOW_SUPPORTED_FEATURES_IN_CURRENT_KERNEL)) { print msg & ret error; } Thanks, > >> >> Thanks, >> >>>>>> >>>>>> So any suggestion on how to implement this? >>>>> >>>>> Which features do we need to disallow? When we introduce new features, they >>>> >>>> I guess it should be the new features. >>>> >>>>> didn't hurt the previous flow by checking f2fs_sb_has_###(). >>>> >>>> Yes, but new features may use new disk layout, if old kernel handled it with old >>>> disk layout, there must be problematic. >>>> >>>> e.g. format image with -O extra_attr, and mount it with kernel who don't >>>> recognize new inode layout. >>> >>> Jaegeuk, >>> >>> Any thoughts? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe: >>>>>> >>>>>> if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 14, 0)) >>>>>> check 4.14+ features >>>>>> else if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 9, 0)) >>>>>> check 4.9+ features >>>>>> else if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 4, 0)) >>>>>> check 4.4+ features >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 13 +++++++++++++ >>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/super.c | 9 +++++++++ >>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>> index f5ffc09705eb..15b640967e12 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>> @@ -151,6 +151,19 @@ struct f2fs_mount_info { >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY 0x0400 /* reserved */ >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM 0x0800 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_ALL_FEATURES (F2FS_FEATURE_ENCRYPT | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_BLKZONED | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_ATOMIC_WRITE | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_EXTRA_ATTR | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_PRJQUOTA | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CHKSUM | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_FLEXIBLE_INLINE_XATTR | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_QUOTA_INO | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CRTIME | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_LOST_FOUND | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM) >>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>> #define __F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(raw_super, mask) \ >>>>>>>> ((raw_super->feature & cpu_to_le32(mask)) != 0) >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(sbi, mask) __F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(sbi->raw_super, mask) >>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>> index 4f8e9ab48b26..57f2fc6d14ba 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>> @@ -2573,6 +2573,15 @@ static int sanity_check_raw_super(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>>>>>>> return 1; >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> + /* check whether kernel supports all features */ >>>>>>>> + if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->feature) & (~F2FS_ALL_FEATURES)) { >>>>>>>> + f2fs_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, >>>>>>>> + "Unsupported feature:%u: supported:%u", >>>>>>>> + le32_to_cpu(raw_super->feature), >>>>>>>> + F2FS_ALL_FEATURES); >>>>>>>> + return 1; >>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>> /* check CP/SIT/NAT/SSA/MAIN_AREA area boundary */ >>>>>>>> if (sanity_check_area_boundary(sbi, bh)) >>>>>>>> return 1; >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> 2.18.0.rc1 >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list >>>> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel >>>> . >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list >>> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel >>> . >>> > . >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity with enabled features in image Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 15:01:31 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <00726135-f210-7791-a372-ef9cb1ae209f@huawei.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190723013546.GA60778@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> On 2019/7/23 9:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 07/16, Chao Yu wrote: >> Hi Jaegeuk, >> >> On 2019/5/9 9:15, Chao Yu wrote: >>> On 2019/5/5 10:51, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> On 2019/5/1 11:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>> On 04/29, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>> On 2019-4-28 21:38, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>> On 04/24, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>> This patch fixes to do sanity with enabled features in image, if >>>>>>>> there are features kernel can not recognize, just fail the mount. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We need to figure out per-feature-based rejection, since some of them can >>>>>>> be set without layout change. >> >> What about adding one field in superblock for compatible features in future? >> >> sb.feature(F2FS_FEATURE_LAST, max] stores uncompatible features >> sb.compatible_feature stores compatible features >> >> If we follow above rule when adding one feature, then, we can fail the mount if >> sb.feature(F2FS_FEATURE_LAST, max] is valid. > > How about adding required_features flag in sb to check part of features only? You mean all incompatible features can be add into sb.required_features later like this? __le32 required_features; /* incompatible feature to old kernel */ And we can check required_features with supported features in current kernel? if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) & (~NOW_SUPPORTED_FEATURES_IN_CURRENT_KERNEL)) { print msg & ret error; } Thanks, > >> >> Thanks, >> >>>>>> >>>>>> So any suggestion on how to implement this? >>>>> >>>>> Which features do we need to disallow? When we introduce new features, they >>>> >>>> I guess it should be the new features. >>>> >>>>> didn't hurt the previous flow by checking f2fs_sb_has_###(). >>>> >>>> Yes, but new features may use new disk layout, if old kernel handled it with old >>>> disk layout, there must be problematic. >>>> >>>> e.g. format image with -O extra_attr, and mount it with kernel who don't >>>> recognize new inode layout. >>> >>> Jaegeuk, >>> >>> Any thoughts? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe: >>>>>> >>>>>> if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 14, 0)) >>>>>> check 4.14+ features >>>>>> else if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 9, 0)) >>>>>> check 4.9+ features >>>>>> else if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(4, 4, 0)) >>>>>> check 4.4+ features >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 13 +++++++++++++ >>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/super.c | 9 +++++++++ >>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>> index f5ffc09705eb..15b640967e12 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>> @@ -151,6 +151,19 @@ struct f2fs_mount_info { >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY 0x0400 /* reserved */ >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM 0x0800 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_ALL_FEATURES (F2FS_FEATURE_ENCRYPT | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_BLKZONED | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_ATOMIC_WRITE | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_EXTRA_ATTR | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_PRJQUOTA | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CHKSUM | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_FLEXIBLE_INLINE_XATTR | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_QUOTA_INO | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CRTIME | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_LOST_FOUND | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY | \ >>>>>>>> + F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM) >>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>> #define __F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(raw_super, mask) \ >>>>>>>> ((raw_super->feature & cpu_to_le32(mask)) != 0) >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(sbi, mask) __F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(sbi->raw_super, mask) >>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>> index 4f8e9ab48b26..57f2fc6d14ba 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>> @@ -2573,6 +2573,15 @@ static int sanity_check_raw_super(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>>>>>>> return 1; >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> + /* check whether kernel supports all features */ >>>>>>>> + if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->feature) & (~F2FS_ALL_FEATURES)) { >>>>>>>> + f2fs_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, >>>>>>>> + "Unsupported feature:%u: supported:%u", >>>>>>>> + le32_to_cpu(raw_super->feature), >>>>>>>> + F2FS_ALL_FEATURES); >>>>>>>> + return 1; >>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>> /* check CP/SIT/NAT/SSA/MAIN_AREA area boundary */ >>>>>>>> if (sanity_check_area_boundary(sbi, bh)) >>>>>>>> return 1; >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> 2.18.0.rc1 >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list >>>> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel >>>> . >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list >>> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel >>> . >>> > . > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-23 7:02 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-04-24 9:48 [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity with enabled features in image Chao Yu 2019-04-24 9:48 ` Chao Yu 2019-04-28 13:38 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2019-04-29 13:57 ` Chao Yu 2019-05-01 3:22 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2019-05-05 2:51 ` Chao Yu 2019-05-05 2:51 ` Chao Yu 2019-05-09 1:15 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu 2019-05-09 1:15 ` Chao Yu 2019-07-16 10:02 ` Chao Yu 2019-07-16 10:02 ` Chao Yu 2019-07-23 1:35 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2019-07-23 1:35 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2019-07-23 7:01 ` Chao Yu [this message] 2019-07-23 7:01 ` Chao Yu 2019-07-29 5:47 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2019-07-29 5:47 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2019-07-29 7:09 ` Chao Yu 2019-07-29 7:09 ` Chao Yu 2019-04-29 20:54 ` Ju Hyung Park
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=00726135-f210-7791-a372-ef9cb1ae209f@huawei.com \ --to=yuchao0@huawei.com \ --cc=chao@kernel.org \ --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \ --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.