From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/5] btrfs-progs: image: Fix block group item flags when restoring multi-device image to single device
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:38:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181127083828.23861-3-wqu@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181127083828.23861-1-wqu@suse.com>
Since btrfs-image is just restoring tree blocks without really check if
that tree block contents makes sense, for multi-device image, block
group items will keep that incorrect block group flags.
For example, for a metadata RAID1 data RAID0 btrfs recovered to a single
disk, its chunk tree will look like:
item 1 key (FIRST_CHUNK_TREE CHUNK_ITEM 22020096)
length 8388608 owner 2 stripe_len 65536 type SYSTEM
item 2 key (FIRST_CHUNK_TREE CHUNK_ITEM 30408704)
length 1073741824 owner 2 stripe_len 65536 type METADATA
item 3 key (FIRST_CHUNK_TREE CHUNK_ITEM 1104150528)
length 1073741824 owner 2 stripe_len 65536 type DATA
All chunks have correct type (SINGLE).
While its block group items will look like:
item 1 key (22020096 BLOCK_GROUP_ITEM 8388608)
block group used 16384 chunk_objectid 256 flags SYSTEM|RAID1
item 3 key (30408704 BLOCK_GROUP_ITEM 1073741824)
block group used 114688 chunk_objectid 256 flags METADATA|RAID1
item 11 key (1104150528 BLOCK_GROUP_ITEM 1073741824)
block group used 1572864 chunk_objectid 256 flags DATA|RAID0
All block group items still have the wrong profiles.
And btrfs check (lowmem mode for better output) will report error for such image:
ERROR: chunk[22020096 30408704) related block group item flags mismatch, wanted: 2, have: 18
ERROR: chunk[30408704 1104150528) related block group item flags mismatch, wanted: 4, have: 20
ERROR: chunk[1104150528 2177892352) related block group item flags mismatch, wanted: 1, have: 9
This patch will do an extra repair for block group items to fix the
profile of them.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
---
image/main.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 46 insertions(+)
diff --git a/image/main.c b/image/main.c
index bbfcf8f19298..9187de34f34a 100644
--- a/image/main.c
+++ b/image/main.c
@@ -2164,6 +2164,51 @@ again:
return 0;
}
+static void fixup_block_groups(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
+{
+ struct btrfs_block_group_cache *bg;
+ struct btrfs_mapping_tree *map_tree = &fs_info->mapping_tree;
+ struct cache_extent *ce;
+ struct map_lookup *map;
+ u64 extra_flags;
+
+ for (ce = search_cache_extent(&map_tree->cache_tree, 0); ce;
+ ce = next_cache_extent(ce)) {
+ map = container_of(ce, struct map_lookup, ce);
+
+ bg = btrfs_lookup_block_group(fs_info, ce->start);
+ if (!bg) {
+ warning(
+ "can't find block group %llu, result fs may not be mountable",
+ ce->start);
+ continue;
+ }
+ extra_flags = map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK;
+
+ if (bg->flags == map->type)
+ continue;
+
+ /* Update the block group item and mark the bg dirty */
+ bg->flags = map->type;
+ btrfs_set_block_group_flags(&bg->item, bg->flags);
+ set_extent_bits(&fs_info->block_group_cache, ce->start,
+ ce->start + ce->size - 1, BLOCK_GROUP_DIRTY);
+
+ /*
+ * Chunk and bg flags can be different, changing bg flags
+ * without update avail_data/meta_alloc_bits will lead to
+ * ENOSPC.
+ * So here we set avail_*_alloc_bits to match chunk types.
+ */
+ if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA)
+ fs_info->avail_data_alloc_bits = extra_flags;
+ if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA)
+ fs_info->avail_metadata_alloc_bits = extra_flags;
+ if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM)
+ fs_info->avail_system_alloc_bits = extra_flags;
+ }
+}
+
static int fixup_chunks_and_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
struct mdrestore_struct *mdres, off_t dev_size)
{
@@ -2180,6 +2225,7 @@ static int fixup_chunks_and_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
return PTR_ERR(trans);
}
+ fixup_block_groups(fs_info);
ret = fixup_device_size(trans, mdres, dev_size);
if (ret < 0)
goto error;
--
2.19.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-27 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-27 8:38 [PATCH v2 0/5] btrfs-progs: image: Fix error when restoring multi-disk image to single disk Qu Wenruo
2018-11-27 8:38 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] btrfs-progs: image: Refactor fixup_devices() to fixup_chunks_and_devices() Qu Wenruo
2018-11-27 8:46 ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-11-27 8:50 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-11-27 8:58 ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-12-04 10:18 ` David Sterba
2018-12-04 10:21 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-12-04 10:20 ` David Sterba
2018-12-04 10:22 ` Qu Wenruo
2018-11-27 8:38 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2018-11-27 8:38 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] btrfs-progs: volumes: Refactor btrfs_alloc_dev_extent() into two functions Qu Wenruo
2018-11-27 8:42 ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-11-27 8:38 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] btrfs-progs: image: Remove all existing dev extents for later rebuild Qu Wenruo
2018-11-27 8:38 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] btrfs-progs: misc-tests/021: Do extra btrfs check before mounting Qu Wenruo
2018-11-27 8:47 ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-12-04 10:34 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] btrfs-progs: image: Fix error when restoring multi-disk image to single disk David Sterba
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=20181127083828.23861-3-wqu@suse.com \
--to=wqu@suse.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).