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=-13.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,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 3208AECE58E for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 06:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1169921835 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 06:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727356AbfJOG2F (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2019 02:28:05 -0400 Received: from mail.cn.fujitsu.com ([183.91.158.132]:31052 "EHLO heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726044AbfJOG2F (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2019 02:28:05 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.67,298,1566835200"; d="scan'208";a="76983173" Received: from unknown (HELO cn.fujitsu.com) ([10.167.33.5]) by heian.cn.fujitsu.com with ESMTP; 15 Oct 2019 14:28:03 +0800 Received: from G08CNEXCHPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local (unknown [10.167.33.83]) by cn.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 956D24CE1504; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 14:27:45 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.167.220.84] (10.167.220.84) by G08CNEXCHPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local (10.167.33.89) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 14:28:00 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation To: "Darrick J. Wong" CC: References: <1570432515-13184-1-git-send-email-xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> <20191007151244.GC13097@magnolia> <56deacb8-1d4a-193c-f41c-469c78d97315@cn.fujitsu.com> <20191014163904.GF26541@magnolia> From: Yang Xu Message-ID: <0925e033-0d0d-6eb4-8b1b-ca980ee5cd20@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 14:27:59 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191014163904.GF26541@magnolia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.167.220.84] X-yoursite-MailScanner-ID: 956D24CE1504.AB00C X-yoursite-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-yoursite-MailScanner-From: xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org on 2019/10/15 0:39, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:39:59AM +0800, Yang Xu wrote: >> >> >> on 2019/10/07 23:12, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:15PM +0800, Yang Xu wrote: >>>> On old kernel, since commit ded188b8609 ("xfs: Fix the situation that mount >>>> operation rejects corrupted XFS") running this case got the mismatched output, >>>> as below: >>> >>> But why did the output mismatch? Did the fs heal itself? Did >>> allocating 5 more files somehow avoid touching the finobt? Is the >>> assignment logic in the loop broken? >> >> The output mismatch because on old kernel, we can mount the corrupted xfs >> and touch action will be refused. so broken is equal to 0. >> The fs doesn't heal ifself. >> allocating 5 more file will touch the finobt. >> >> You can see this url >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/commit/?id=ded188b86096e2845e59dedae6050c7f254a96b >> >> eg xfs/087, they all delete "broken=0" before allocationg 5 more file. >> commit ded188b86 compatibled old kernel(permit mount and refuse touch) and >> new kernel(refuse mount) behavior on corrupted xfs. Or, I misunderstand >> this case? > > How old is the kernel? At some point (4.10, I think?) we added a patch > to reserve metadata blocks for future free inode btree expansion. That > required us to count the blocks in the finobt, at which point xfs/097's > behavior changed such that the fs doesn't mount after the test corrupts > the finobt. I test this case on kernel-3.10.0-1062.el7.x86_64. I find the patch you said to reserve metadata blocks for future free inode btree expansion. This kernel doesn't backport this commit 76d771b4 ("xfs: use per-AG reservations for the finobt"), so it permmits to mount. I can understand your meaning. But from xfstests commit ded188b86, it looks like refuse touch or refuse mount is acceptable for xfstests. Also, xfs/087 is a similar case but it sets broken=1 instead of broken =0. Before this kernel commit 76d771b4, xfs/087(xfs/097) permits mount and refuse touch, after this commit, xfs/087(xfs/097) refuses mount. I think we should keep xfs/097 consistent with xfs/087. What do you think about it? ps:my patch is intend to fix the inconsistent of broken assignment operation that xfstests commit ded188b86 introduced. Thanks Yang Xu > > --D > >>> >>> --D >>> >>>> ----------------------------------- >>>> + check fs >>>> + corrupt image >>>> + mount image && modify files >>>> -broken: 1 >>>> +broken: 0 >>>> + repair fs >>>> + mount image (2) >>>> ------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> It fails because the broken is always equal to 0 when _try_scratch_mount >>>> succeed. So remove this wrong assignment operation. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu >>>> --- >>>> tests/xfs/097 | 2 -- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tests/xfs/097 b/tests/xfs/097 >>>> index 1cb7d69c..20791738 100755 >>>> --- a/tests/xfs/097 >>>> +++ b/tests/xfs/097 >>>> @@ -81,8 +81,6 @@ done >>>> echo "+ mount image && modify files" >>>> broken=1 >>>> if _try_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full 2>&1; then >>>> - >>>> - broken=0 >>>> for x in `seq 65 70`; do >>>> touch "${TESTFILE}.${x}" 2> /dev/null && broken=0 >>>> done >>>> -- >>>> 2.18.1 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >