All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca>
Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Enlarging w/ xfs_growfs: XFS_IOC_FSGROWFSDATA xfsctl failed: Inappropriate ioctl for device
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:39:21 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181213213921.GG6311@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADyTPEyOD6jTQF1QEc8M753=KAjbnbHFTLERhJZdCLuzT9r21w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 11:49:36PM -0500, Nick Bowler wrote:
> On 2018-12-12, Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> wrote:
> > On 2018-12-12, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:56:33PM -0500, Nick Bowler wrote:
> >>> OK, xfstests has revealed some trouble with the three "bulkstat" ioctls,
> >>> since while the xfs_bulkstat structure itself is fine, one of its
> >>> members
> >>> is used as a pointer to various structures which are not fine.  This
> >>> wasn't too hard to fix though.
> >>
> >> IIRC, there's bigger problems than you realise here - the bulkstat
> >> structure has embedded timestamps in them and on x32 struct timeval
> >> doesn't match either ia32 or x86-64. i.e. on ia32, struct timeval is
> >> 8 bytes, on x86-64 it is 16 bytes, and in x32 it is 12 bytes.
> >
> > This is not the case: struct timeval is 16 bytes on x32:
> >
> >   sizeof (struct timeval): 16
> >   tv_sec          size:   8 offset:   0
> >   tv_usec         size:   8 offset:   8

I was just quoting the kernel time subsystem maintainer who
said that these structures had problems with size and packing.

> >
> > This is the same as what I get on native 64-bit compilations; but
> > anyway the xfs_bstat structure has xfs_bstime members, with the
> > following characteristics on x32:
> >
> >   sizeof (struct xfs_bstime): 16
> >   tv_sec          size:   8 offset:   0
> >   tv_nsec         size:   4 offset:   8
> >
> > which is also the same as native 64-bit (time_t is the same on x32 and
> > native: 8 bytes with 8 byte alignment).
> >
> > I manually verified every member of the xfs_bstat structure with sizeof
> > and offsetof on -mx32 and -m64 compilations to ensure that this structure
> > matches precisely between the x32 and native 64-bit cases.
> 
> To expand on this, for each structure which my RFC patchset feeds up to
> the native handler, I first checked them by manual inspection and then
> double checked using the following program; we can compile with both
> -mx32 and -m64 and check that the output is identical.

So, turn that into an xfstest so that it is always run, diffs the
output between compat/native depending on which one is used complete
with guards that break the test when we add a new ioctl. We already
we have a test that is for explicitly checking that structures on disk
are the same for 32/64 bit architectures: tests/xfs/122

That test automates the generation of the test code and output,
and if it changes from the golden output, then the test fails.
I'd suggest that a similar thing is done here for /all/ the
structures we expose in ioctls.

FWIW, pahole can make this easy. e.g you can harvest every ioctl
structure from xfs_fs.h, write them into a file like so:

$ cat t.c
#include <xfs/xfs.h>

/* these should be the same for x32/x86-64, but not i386 */
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
	struct xfs_bstat bs = {0};
	struct xfs_fsop_geom_v1 geo1 = {0};
	struct xfs_fsop_geom geo = {0};
	struct xfs_growfs_data gd = {0};
	struct xfs_growfs_rt gr = {0};
	struct xfs_flock64 fl = {0};
	struct xfs_inogrp ig = {0};
	struct xfs_swapext se = {0};

	return 0;
}

And then compile and dump the structure layouts like so:
$ gcc -m64 -gdwarf-2 t.c -c; pahole t.o > t.x86-64
$ gcc -mx32 -gdwarf-2 t.c -c; pahole t.o > t.x32
$ gcc -m32 -gdwarf-2 t.c -c; pahole t.o > t.i386

Then we'll have tests that will fail if we ever change an ioctl or
add a new one and don't add it to the test. That guarantees we won't
ever forget about this....

Cheers,

Dave.

-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-13 21:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-10  4:29 Enlarging w/ xfs_growfs: XFS_IOC_FSGROWFSDATA xfsctl failed: Inappropriate ioctl for device Nick Bowler
2018-12-10 14:33 ` Brian Foster
2018-12-10 15:39   ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-10 16:11     ` Brian Foster
2018-12-10 16:50       ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-12-10 16:55         ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-12-10 17:46         ` Brian Foster
2018-12-10 20:54           ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-10 21:41             ` Dave Chinner
2018-12-11  7:04               ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-11 12:27                 ` Brian Foster
2018-12-11 20:13                   ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-11 20:20                     ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-12 13:09                       ` Brian Foster
2018-12-13  0:21                         ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-12  4:56                   ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-13  3:53                     ` Dave Chinner
2018-12-13  4:14                       ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-13  4:49                         ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-13 21:39                           ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2018-12-13 21:53                             ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-14  1:43                               ` Dave Chinner
2018-12-14  3:35                             ` Nick Bowler
2018-12-14  3:40                               ` [RFC PATCH xfstests] xfs: add tests to validate ioctl structure layout Nick Bowler
2019-01-15 15:55                                 ` Luis Chamberlain
2018-12-13 16:30                       ` Enlarging w/ xfs_growfs: XFS_IOC_FSGROWFSDATA xfsctl failed: Inappropriate ioctl for device Darrick J. Wong

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=20181213213921.GG6311@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
    --cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nbowler@draconx.ca \
    /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: link
Be 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.