From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A859C433FF for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 02:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3435F2173B for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 02:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731435AbfHFCWg (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:22:36 -0400 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:3764 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729921AbfHFCWf (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:22:35 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS414-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 003FABA19E8410753350; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 10:22:33 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.214) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 10:22:32 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND] f2fs: introduce sb.required_features to store incompatible features To: Jaegeuk Kim CC: Chao Yu , , References: <20190730231850.GA7097@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <20190801042215.GC84433@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <345c55ea-01c2-a9d1-4367-716dbd08ae9d@huawei.com> <20190801223509.GB27597@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <8e906ddb-81d8-b63e-0c19-1ee9fc7f5cbf@huawei.com> <20190806003522.GA98101@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <20190806012407.GB1029@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <103d1df0-eb5b-4854-0959-a84785eb85a8@huawei.com> <20190806021144.GB7280@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 10:22:50 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190806021144.GB7280@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/8/6 10:11, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 08/06, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2019/8/6 9:24, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> On 08/06, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> On 2019/8/6 8:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>> On 08/02, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>> On 2019/8/2 6:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>> On 08/01, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2019/8/1 12:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 07/31, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2019/7/31 7:18, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 07/29, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> From: Chao Yu >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Later after this patch was merged, all new incompatible feature's >>>>>>>>>>>> bit should be added into sb.required_features field, and define new >>>>>>>>>>>> feature function with F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_FUNCS() macro. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Then during mount, we will do sanity check with enabled features in >>>>>>>>>>>> image, if there are features in sb.required_features that kernel can >>>>>>>>>>>> not recognize, just fail the mount. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu >>>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>>> v3: >>>>>>>>>>>> - change commit title. >>>>>>>>>>>> - fix wrong macro name. >>>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 15 +++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/super.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>> include/linux/f2fs_fs.h | 3 ++- >>>>>>>>>>>> 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> index a6eb828af57f..b8e17d4ddb8d 100644 >>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -163,6 +163,15 @@ struct f2fs_mount_info { >>>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_CLEAR_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> (sbi->raw_super->feature &= ~cpu_to_le32(mask)) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES 0 >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_HAS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + ((sbi->raw_super->required_features & cpu_to_le32(mask)) != 0) >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_SET_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + (sbi->raw_super->required_features |= cpu_to_le32(mask)) >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_CLEAR_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + (sbi->raw_super->required_features &= ~cpu_to_le32(mask)) >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> /* >>>>>>>>>>>> * Default values for user and/or group using reserved blocks >>>>>>>>>>>> */ >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -3585,6 +3594,12 @@ F2FS_FEATURE_FUNCS(lost_found, LOST_FOUND); >>>>>>>>>>>> F2FS_FEATURE_FUNCS(sb_chksum, SB_CHKSUM); >>>>>>>>>>>> F2FS_FEATURE_FUNCS(casefold, CASEFOLD); >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_FUNCS(name, flagname) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> +static inline int f2fs_sb_has_##name(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> +{ \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + return F2FS_HAS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, F2FS_FEATURE_##flagname); \ >>>>>>>>>>>> +} >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED >>>>>>>>>>>> static inline bool f2fs_blkz_is_seq(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int devi, >>>>>>>>>>>> block_t blkaddr) >>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>>>>>> index 5540fee0fe3f..3701dcce90e6 100644 >>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -2513,6 +2513,16 @@ static int sanity_check_raw_super(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>>>>>>>>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> + /* check whether current kernel supports all features on image */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) & >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY 0x0400 /* reserved */ >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x1BFF >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) & ~F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT) { >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Um, I thought .required_features are used to store new feature flags from 0x0. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All 'F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT' bits should be stored in sb.feature instead of >>>>>>>>>> sb.required_features, I'm confused... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm thinking, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> f2fs-tools sb->required_features f2fs F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT >>>>>>>>> v0 0 v0 no_check -> ok >>>>>>>>> v1 0x1BFF v0 no_check -> ok >>>>>>>>> v0 0 v1 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>>>>> v1 0x1BFF v1 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>>>>> v2 0x3BFF v1 0x1BFF -> fail >>>>>>>>> v1 0x1BFF v2 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>>>>> v2 0x3BFF v2 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I see, it's a bit waste for 0x1FFF low bits in sb->required_features. Why not >>>>>>>> leaving 0x0FFF in sb->feature w/o sanity check. And make all new incompatible >>>>>>>> features (including casefold) adding into sb->required_features. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think we can define like this, and we still have 32bits feature filed. >>>>>>> This would give another confusion to understand. VERITY is reserved only now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x0001 >>>>>> >>>>>> Oops, so you want to make .required_features being almost a mirror of .feature, >>>>>> and do sanity check on it... I can see now. :P >>>>>> >>>>>> If so, why not just use .feature: >>>>> >>>>> Sometimes, we don't need to set the flag, but not required at some point. >>>>> (e.g., verify) >>>> >>>> Sorry, I'm not sure whether I have understood your point... :( >>>> >>>> IIUC of your point, we have defined F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT (0x0BFF) which excludes >>>> F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY (0x0400) feature bit, then once verity feature merged in >>>> kernel, we can add it into F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT, any problem we may face here? >>> >>> I was thinking the cases like "don't care features" made by mkfs. For example, >>> mkfs can set F2FS_FEATURE_BLKZONED, which doesn't need f2fs being supported. >> >> Yes, I can understand this. >> >> So F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT can exclude them directly? > > No, I'd like to control it via mkfs. Kernel always needs to say what they can > support, IIUC your point. Oh, it's different macros, we will define F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x19B9, and F2FS_ALL_FEATURE_SUPPORT (0x0001 | 0x0002 ... ). In sanity check function, we only check .feature with F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_SUPPORT. And of course, meanwhile kernel will say it supports features in F2FS_ALL_FEATURE_SUPPORT. Thanks, > >> >> excluded: >> >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_BLKZONED 0x0002 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_ATOMIC_WRITE 0x0004 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_LOST_FOUND 0x0200 >> >> included: >> >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_ENCRYPT 0x0001 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_EXTRA_ATTR 0x0008 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_PRJQUOTA 0x0010 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CHKSUM 0x0020 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_FLEXIBLE_INLINE_XATTR 0x0040 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_QUOTA_INO 0x0080 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CRTIME 0x0100 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM 0x0800 >> //#define F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY 0x0400 /* reserved */ >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >> >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x19B9 >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> kernel tool >>>>>> v5.2 .. 1.12 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0BFF >>>>>> >>>>>> v5.3 .. 1.13 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x1BFF >>>>>> >>>>>> v5.4 .. 1.14 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_COMPRESS 0x2000 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x3BFF >>>>>> >>>>>> f2fs-tools sb->feature f2fs F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT >>>>>> >>>>>> [enable all features in tools] >>>>>> v1.12 0x0BFF v5.2 no_check -> ok >>>>>> v1.12 0x0BFF v5.3 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>> v1.12 0x0BFF v5.4 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>> >>>>>> v1.13 0x1BFF v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>> v1.13 0x1BFF v5.3 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>> v1.13 0x1BFF v5.4 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>> >>>>>> v1.14 0x3BFF v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>> v1.14 0x3BFF v5.3 0x1BFF -> fail >>>>>> v1.14 0x3BFF v5.4 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>> >>>>>> Or am I missing something? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then that would be: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> kernel tool >>>>>>>> v5.2 .. 1.12 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0000 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v5.3 .. 1.13 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x0001 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0001 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v5.4 .. 1.14 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x0001 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_COMPRESS 0x0002 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0003 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> f2fs-tools sb->required_features f2fs F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v1.12 0x0000 v5.2 no_check -> ok >>>>>>>> v1.12 0x0000 v5.3 0x0001 -> ok >>>>>>>> v1.12 0x0000 v5.4 0x0003 -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v1.13 0x0001 v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>>>> v1.13 0x0001 v5.3 0x0001 -> ok >>>>>>>> v1.13 0x0001 v5.4 0x0003 -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v1.14 0x0003 v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>>>> v1.14 0x0003 v5.3 0x0001 -> fail >>>>>>>> v1.14 0x0003 v5.4 0x0003 -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And all compatible features can be added into sb->feature[_VERITY, ....]. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Would that okay to you? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> + ~F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES) { >>>>>>>>>>>> + f2fs_info(sbi, "Unsupported feature: %x: supported: %x", >>>>>>>>>>>> + le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) ^ >>>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES, >>>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES); >>>>>>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL; >>>>>>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> /* Check checksum_offset and crc in superblock */ >>>>>>>>>>>> if (__F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(raw_super, F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM)) { >>>>>>>>>>>> crc_offset = le32_to_cpu(raw_super->checksum_offset); >>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h b/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> index a2b36b2e286f..4141be3f219c 100644 >>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -117,7 +117,8 @@ struct f2fs_super_block { >>>>>>>>>>>> __u8 hot_ext_count; /* # of hot file extension */ >>>>>>>>>>>> __le16 s_encoding; /* Filename charset encoding */ >>>>>>>>>>>> __le16 s_encoding_flags; /* Filename charset encoding flags */ >>>>>>>>>>>> - __u8 reserved[306]; /* valid reserved region */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + __le32 required_features; /* incompatible features to old kernel */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + __u8 reserved[302]; /* valid reserved region */ >>>>>>>>>>>> __le32 crc; /* checksum of superblock */ >>>>>>>>>>>> } __packed; >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> 2.22.0 >>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>> . >>> > . > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8131CC433FF for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 02:22:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AFEF2147A for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 02:22:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="UYSJiw/d"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="YeV9E0zJ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4AFEF2147A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hup7c-0002N0-Si; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 02:22:44 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hup7b-0002Ms-H8 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 02:22:43 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=OPU88Fq6/dHSU5uTP7X1LMeSVqRlNsR7qHjVDnQh8SU=; b=UYSJiw/ddcPhXjrVn5RLeYQHCT NHQ4uLfGb6LDAyYHdytjdTxxmcZ5q7PtW5/ZwTd3CYN3nSuSYzWO5jJ6XXzMiY/BcwvagvVmGlEyH jw8V/wOQ2+rlGDnLVwekPQ+h6MhlWxPo6UioBtD8md9trIBVG1wFFK7sZUYOWMDxSYJs=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=OPU88Fq6/dHSU5uTP7X1LMeSVqRlNsR7qHjVDnQh8SU=; b=YeV9E0zJfapobf4BI4BBV7kGYD hnkZWMiI9uShaRbOlQiTqPZElt+AyF+bVzYId2t9xNSKdAe2VQxDvqHCjvY7cOj63zJKnfIWq1af7 kPcbLAiFHaZyEPpsD99P5Ammiov4pu2ZA2i6gSJeDKEqubTpffaqDpXsOQEszBp8LOks=; Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-1.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) id 1hup7Y-00COjD-Sb for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 02:22:43 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS414-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 003FABA19E8410753350; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 10:22:33 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.214) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 10:22:32 +0800 To: Jaegeuk Kim References: <20190730231850.GA7097@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <20190801042215.GC84433@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <345c55ea-01c2-a9d1-4367-716dbd08ae9d@huawei.com> <20190801223509.GB27597@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <8e906ddb-81d8-b63e-0c19-1ee9fc7f5cbf@huawei.com> <20190806003522.GA98101@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <20190806012407.GB1029@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <103d1df0-eb5b-4854-0959-a84785eb85a8@huawei.com> <20190806021144.GB7280@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 10:22:50 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190806021144.GB7280@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1hup7Y-00COjD-Sb Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v3 RESEND] f2fs: introduce sb.required_features to store incompatible features X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 2019/8/6 10:11, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 08/06, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2019/8/6 9:24, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> On 08/06, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> On 2019/8/6 8:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>> On 08/02, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>> On 2019/8/2 6:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>> On 08/01, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2019/8/1 12:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 07/31, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2019/7/31 7:18, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 07/29, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> From: Chao Yu >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Later after this patch was merged, all new incompatible feature's >>>>>>>>>>>> bit should be added into sb.required_features field, and define new >>>>>>>>>>>> feature function with F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_FUNCS() macro. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Then during mount, we will do sanity check with enabled features in >>>>>>>>>>>> image, if there are features in sb.required_features that kernel can >>>>>>>>>>>> not recognize, just fail the mount. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu >>>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>>> v3: >>>>>>>>>>>> - change commit title. >>>>>>>>>>>> - fix wrong macro name. >>>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 15 +++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/super.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>>>>>>>>>>> include/linux/f2fs_fs.h | 3 ++- >>>>>>>>>>>> 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> index a6eb828af57f..b8e17d4ddb8d 100644 >>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -163,6 +163,15 @@ struct f2fs_mount_info { >>>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_CLEAR_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> (sbi->raw_super->feature &= ~cpu_to_le32(mask)) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES 0 >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_HAS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + ((sbi->raw_super->required_features & cpu_to_le32(mask)) != 0) >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_SET_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + (sbi->raw_super->required_features |= cpu_to_le32(mask)) >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_CLEAR_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, mask) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + (sbi->raw_super->required_features &= ~cpu_to_le32(mask)) >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> /* >>>>>>>>>>>> * Default values for user and/or group using reserved blocks >>>>>>>>>>>> */ >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -3585,6 +3594,12 @@ F2FS_FEATURE_FUNCS(lost_found, LOST_FOUND); >>>>>>>>>>>> F2FS_FEATURE_FUNCS(sb_chksum, SB_CHKSUM); >>>>>>>>>>>> F2FS_FEATURE_FUNCS(casefold, CASEFOLD); >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +#define F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_FUNCS(name, flagname) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> +static inline int f2fs_sb_has_##name(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) \ >>>>>>>>>>>> +{ \ >>>>>>>>>>>> + return F2FS_HAS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sbi, F2FS_FEATURE_##flagname); \ >>>>>>>>>>>> +} >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED >>>>>>>>>>>> static inline bool f2fs_blkz_is_seq(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int devi, >>>>>>>>>>>> block_t blkaddr) >>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>>>>>> index 5540fee0fe3f..3701dcce90e6 100644 >>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -2513,6 +2513,16 @@ static int sanity_check_raw_super(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >>>>>>>>>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> + /* check whether current kernel supports all features on image */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) & >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY 0x0400 /* reserved */ >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >>>>>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x1BFF >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> if (le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) & ~F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT) { >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Um, I thought .required_features are used to store new feature flags from 0x0. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All 'F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT' bits should be stored in sb.feature instead of >>>>>>>>>> sb.required_features, I'm confused... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm thinking, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> f2fs-tools sb->required_features f2fs F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT >>>>>>>>> v0 0 v0 no_check -> ok >>>>>>>>> v1 0x1BFF v0 no_check -> ok >>>>>>>>> v0 0 v1 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>>>>> v1 0x1BFF v1 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>>>>> v2 0x3BFF v1 0x1BFF -> fail >>>>>>>>> v1 0x1BFF v2 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>>>>> v2 0x3BFF v2 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I see, it's a bit waste for 0x1FFF low bits in sb->required_features. Why not >>>>>>>> leaving 0x0FFF in sb->feature w/o sanity check. And make all new incompatible >>>>>>>> features (including casefold) adding into sb->required_features. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think we can define like this, and we still have 32bits feature filed. >>>>>>> This would give another confusion to understand. VERITY is reserved only now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x0001 >>>>>> >>>>>> Oops, so you want to make .required_features being almost a mirror of .feature, >>>>>> and do sanity check on it... I can see now. :P >>>>>> >>>>>> If so, why not just use .feature: >>>>> >>>>> Sometimes, we don't need to set the flag, but not required at some point. >>>>> (e.g., verify) >>>> >>>> Sorry, I'm not sure whether I have understood your point... :( >>>> >>>> IIUC of your point, we have defined F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT (0x0BFF) which excludes >>>> F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY (0x0400) feature bit, then once verity feature merged in >>>> kernel, we can add it into F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT, any problem we may face here? >>> >>> I was thinking the cases like "don't care features" made by mkfs. For example, >>> mkfs can set F2FS_FEATURE_BLKZONED, which doesn't need f2fs being supported. >> >> Yes, I can understand this. >> >> So F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT can exclude them directly? > > No, I'd like to control it via mkfs. Kernel always needs to say what they can > support, IIUC your point. Oh, it's different macros, we will define F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x19B9, and F2FS_ALL_FEATURE_SUPPORT (0x0001 | 0x0002 ... ). In sanity check function, we only check .feature with F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_SUPPORT. And of course, meanwhile kernel will say it supports features in F2FS_ALL_FEATURE_SUPPORT. Thanks, > >> >> excluded: >> >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_BLKZONED 0x0002 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_ATOMIC_WRITE 0x0004 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_LOST_FOUND 0x0200 >> >> included: >> >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_ENCRYPT 0x0001 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_EXTRA_ATTR 0x0008 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_PRJQUOTA 0x0010 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CHKSUM 0x0020 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_FLEXIBLE_INLINE_XATTR 0x0040 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_QUOTA_INO 0x0080 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_INODE_CRTIME 0x0100 >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM 0x0800 >> //#define F2FS_FEATURE_VERITY 0x0400 /* reserved */ >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >> >> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x19B9 >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> kernel tool >>>>>> v5.2 .. 1.12 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0BFF >>>>>> >>>>>> v5.3 .. 1.13 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x1BFF >>>>>> >>>>>> v5.4 .. 1.14 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x1000 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_COMPRESS 0x2000 >>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x3BFF >>>>>> >>>>>> f2fs-tools sb->feature f2fs F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT >>>>>> >>>>>> [enable all features in tools] >>>>>> v1.12 0x0BFF v5.2 no_check -> ok >>>>>> v1.12 0x0BFF v5.3 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>> v1.12 0x0BFF v5.4 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>> >>>>>> v1.13 0x1BFF v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>> v1.13 0x1BFF v5.3 0x1BFF -> ok >>>>>> v1.13 0x1BFF v5.4 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>> >>>>>> v1.14 0x3BFF v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>> v1.14 0x3BFF v5.3 0x1BFF -> fail >>>>>> v1.14 0x3BFF v5.4 0x3BFF -> ok >>>>>> >>>>>> Or am I missing something? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then that would be: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> kernel tool >>>>>>>> v5.2 .. 1.12 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0000 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v5.3 .. 1.13 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x0001 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0001 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v5.4 .. 1.14 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD 0x0001 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_COMPRESS 0x0002 >>>>>>>> #define F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT 0x0003 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> f2fs-tools sb->required_features f2fs F2FS_FEATURE_SUPPORT >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v1.12 0x0000 v5.2 no_check -> ok >>>>>>>> v1.12 0x0000 v5.3 0x0001 -> ok >>>>>>>> v1.12 0x0000 v5.4 0x0003 -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v1.13 0x0001 v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>>>> v1.13 0x0001 v5.3 0x0001 -> ok >>>>>>>> v1.13 0x0001 v5.4 0x0003 -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v1.14 0x0003 v5.2 that's issue we need to fix >>>>>>>> v1.14 0x0003 v5.3 0x0001 -> fail >>>>>>>> v1.14 0x0003 v5.4 0x0003 -> ok >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And all compatible features can be added into sb->feature[_VERITY, ....]. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Would that okay to you? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> + ~F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES) { >>>>>>>>>>>> + f2fs_info(sbi, "Unsupported feature: %x: supported: %x", >>>>>>>>>>>> + le32_to_cpu(raw_super->required_features) ^ >>>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES, >>>>>>>>>>>> + F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURES); >>>>>>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL; >>>>>>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> /* Check checksum_offset and crc in superblock */ >>>>>>>>>>>> if (__F2FS_HAS_FEATURE(raw_super, F2FS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM)) { >>>>>>>>>>>> crc_offset = le32_to_cpu(raw_super->checksum_offset); >>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h b/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> index a2b36b2e286f..4141be3f219c 100644 >>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -117,7 +117,8 @@ struct f2fs_super_block { >>>>>>>>>>>> __u8 hot_ext_count; /* # of hot file extension */ >>>>>>>>>>>> __le16 s_encoding; /* Filename charset encoding */ >>>>>>>>>>>> __le16 s_encoding_flags; /* Filename charset encoding flags */ >>>>>>>>>>>> - __u8 reserved[306]; /* valid reserved region */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + __le32 required_features; /* incompatible features to old kernel */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + __u8 reserved[302]; /* valid reserved region */ >>>>>>>>>>>> __le32 crc; /* checksum of superblock */ >>>>>>>>>>>> } __packed; >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> 2.22.0 >>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>> . >>> > . > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel