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=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, 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 291DCC31E40 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:16:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E82C420663 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:16:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726823AbfHLHQG (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Aug 2019 03:16:06 -0400 Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.35]:45458 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725923AbfHLHQG (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Aug 2019 03:16:06 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS408-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id B75B594C6662102285B6; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:15:54 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.208) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:15:50 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND] f2fs: introduce sb.required_features to store incompatible features To: Jaegeuk Kim CC: Chao Yu , , References: <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> <20190809152642.GC93481@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:15:51 +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: <20190809152642.GC93481@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 2019/8/9 23:26, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 08/06, Chao Yu wrote: >> 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. > > Still I don't get the point where we need multiple macros. Why not user just can We don't have to, but I just meant all supported and incompatible features are different in kernel side. > give required_feature in mkfs and check it by kernel later? Yes, we can, I just doubt that we don't need the field .required_features... Because .feature has included all features user wanted, and F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_SUPPORT has included all features (need layout change) kernel need to check. I didn't get the point why we need additional field, am I missing something? Thanks, > >> >> 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,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 571D7C433FF for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:16:08 +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 2007B2087B for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:16:08 +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="O5HgHV2g"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="MDxjh6M+" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2007B2087B 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-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hx4Yp-0000Xo-3F; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:16:07 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hx4Yn-0000XV-40 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:16:05 +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=eHeOvOzDY+GlVxl2OLwEHZ3jHcjkETu4Q0Mzglo5kxM=; b=O5HgHV2gywsghxXwodkUOUKf5E hPUCvZET9WDKyxkmAG09FwPAciLO/8MnRlkyXyUhqeeQKYFGtBqhzchONEkW8/ReCzoUc7YfUy/5z 2E4WK2fAgC+gozH7lehG43notAaikUe+pXQpnlbj2KvzD4ROpEbnDZ7ZSSEYx0vubSFM=; 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=eHeOvOzDY+GlVxl2OLwEHZ3jHcjkETu4Q0Mzglo5kxM=; b=MDxjh6M+/L9YsjVVPswIBmztG3 kSu5WVMo0U/N51ifFQDKYfqG5Lsgi4jgXXn8TE1aAVZYTHxdghg8c1PFLdwmiOvB0MHHYbiSAGQEg Tm4Lq7Wkedcg1dYIA0YMFgqpsyUKmL2IkqZWkroNoMQn2EKHOxILyNVOWcWS8i44QnPM=; Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.35] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-4.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) id 1hx4Yk-000QEb-Ch for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:16:05 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS408-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id B75B594C6662102285B6; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:15:54 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.208) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:15:50 +0800 To: Jaegeuk Kim References: <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> <20190809152642.GC93481@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:15:51 +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: <20190809152642.GC93481@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1hx4Yk-000QEb-Ch 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 2019/8/9 23:26, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 08/06, Chao Yu wrote: >> 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. > > Still I don't get the point where we need multiple macros. Why not user just can We don't have to, but I just meant all supported and incompatible features are different in kernel side. > give required_feature in mkfs and check it by kernel later? Yes, we can, I just doubt that we don't need the field .required_features... Because .feature has included all features user wanted, and F2FS_INCOMPAT_FEATURE_SUPPORT has included all features (need layout change) kernel need to check. I didn't get the point why we need additional field, am I missing something? Thanks, > >> >> 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