From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sandeen.net ([63.231.237.45]:48852 "EHLO sandeen.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752006AbeDHBsz (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Apr 2018 21:48:55 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] xfs: quota fixes and enhancements References: <6479893d-7f01-f262-6ec5-84a33237d2d8@sandeen.net> <20180408013757.GN7500@magnolia> From: Eric Sandeen Message-ID: <91de46d5-c861-655b-1961-bf4073d1c989@sandeen.net> Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 20:48:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180408013757.GN7500@magnolia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: linux-xfs On 4/7/18 8:37 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 05:00:13PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 4/4/18 1:47 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> A semi-random smattering of quota stuff. First three seem quite >>> good to go, the rest are more along the lines of a suggestion >>> or conversation-starter. ;) >>> >>> (the first patch is just removing an unused arg). >>> >>> xfs_repair doesn't look at quota blocks. At all. It relies >>> on quotacheck in the kernel to fix them up as needed. >> >> I'm starting to rethink a lot of this hackery. Why doesn't xfs_repair >> just fix things up? (leave quotacheck to the next mount, but the >> "repair" stuff in the kernel seems like a really strange wart.) >> >> I think I'll look at teaching repair to sanity check the quota >> inodes, but if anyone knows why that's a bad idea please let me >> know. ;) > > /me shrugs, we still need to fix the kernel's quota verifiers to check > the uuid and all that, right? Which means that both are going to need > patches, afaict. The verifiers do check UUID: xfs_dquot_buf_read_verify xfs_dquot_buf_verify_crc if (!uuid_equal(&d->dd_uuid, &mp->m_sb.sb_meta_uuid)) return false; the issue is that neither the kernel nor userspace repairs this error if it's detected. -Eric