From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: tree-checker: Don't check max block group size as current max chunk size limit is unreliable
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 18:15:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3cd7ba2f-377f-604e-5996-fbf5086b9843@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181123010636.19363-1-wqu@suse.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2519 bytes --]
Gentle ping.
Please put this patch into current release as the new block group size
limit check introduced in v4.19 is causing at least 2 reports in mail list.
Thanks,
Qu
On 2018/11/23 上午9:06, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> [BUG]
> A completely valid btrfs will refuse to mount, with error message like:
> BTRFS critical (device sdb2): corrupt leaf: root=2 block=239681536 slot=172 \
> bg_start=12018974720 bg_len=10888413184, invalid block group size, \
> have 10888413184 expect (0, 10737418240]
>
> Btrfs check returns no error, and all kernels used on this fs is later
> than 2011, which should all have the 10G size limit commit.
>
> [CAUSE]
> For a 12 devices btrfs, we could allocate a chunk larger than 10G due to
> stripe stripe bump up.
>
> __btrfs_alloc_chunk()
> |- max_stripe_size = 1G
> |- max_chunk_size = 10G
> |- data_stripe = 11
> |- if (1G * 11 > 10G) {
> stripe_size = 976128930;
> stripe_size = round_up(976128930, SZ_16M) = 989855744
>
> However the final stripe_size (989855744) * 11 = 10888413184, which is
> still larger than 10G.
>
> [FIX]
> For the comprehensive check, we need to do the full check at chunk
> read time, and rely on bg <-> chunk mapping to do the check.
>
> We could just skip the length check for now.
>
> Fixes: fce466eab7ac ("btrfs: tree-checker: Verify block_group_item")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.19+
> Reported-by: Wang Yugui <wangyugui@e16-tech.com>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c | 8 +++-----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> index cab0b1f1f741..d8bd5340fbbc 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> @@ -389,13 +389,11 @@ static int check_block_group_item(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
>
> /*
> * Here we don't really care about alignment since extent allocator can
> - * handle it. We care more about the size, as if one block group is
> - * larger than maximum size, it's must be some obvious corruption.
> + * handle it. We care more about the size.
> */
> - if (key->offset > BTRFS_MAX_DATA_CHUNK_SIZE || key->offset == 0) {
> + if (key->offset == 0) {
> block_group_err(fs_info, leaf, slot,
> - "invalid block group size, have %llu expect (0, %llu]",
> - key->offset, BTRFS_MAX_DATA_CHUNK_SIZE);
> + "invalid block group size 0");
> return -EUCLEAN;
> }
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-04 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-23 1:06 [PATCH] btrfs: tree-checker: Don't check max block group size as current max chunk size limit is unreliable Qu Wenruo
2018-12-04 10:15 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2018-12-04 13:38 ` David Sterba
2018-12-04 13:52 ` David Sterba
2018-12-04 14:10 ` Qu Wenruo
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=3cd7ba2f-377f-604e-5996-fbf5086b9843@gmx.com \
--to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wqu@suse.com \
/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).