* [PATCH] btrfs: block group: do not exclude bytenr adjacent to block group
@ 2019-11-18 5:56 damenly.su
2019-11-18 9:56 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-20 6:50 ` Su Yue
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: damenly.su @ 2019-11-18 5:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-btrfs; +Cc: Damenly_Su
From: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
while excluding super stripes from one block group, the logical bytenr
should not be excluded if the block group's start + length equals the
bytenr since the bytenr is not belong to the block group.
This is insipred by same bugous code of btrfs-progs.
The fuzz image is rejected to be mounted by tree-checker, but not
bad to enhance the check in practice.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
---
fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
index 1e521db3ef56..54f970f459f5 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
@@ -1539,7 +1539,7 @@ static int exclude_super_stripes(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
while (nr--) {
u64 start, len;
- if (logical[nr] > cache->start + cache->length)
+ if (logical[nr] >= cache->start + cache->length)
continue;
if (logical[nr] + stripe_len <= cache->start)
--
2.23.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: block group: do not exclude bytenr adjacent to block group
2019-11-18 5:56 [PATCH] btrfs: block group: do not exclude bytenr adjacent to block group damenly.su
@ 2019-11-18 9:56 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-20 2:26 ` Su Yue
2019-11-20 6:50 ` Su Yue
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Nikolay Borisov @ 2019-11-18 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: damenly.su, linux-btrfs; +Cc: Damenly_Su
On 18.11.19 г. 7:56 ч., damenly.su@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
>
> while excluding super stripes from one block group, the logical bytenr
> should not be excluded if the block group's start + length equals the
> bytenr since the bytenr is not belong to the block group.
>
> This is insipred by same bugous code of btrfs-progs.
> The fuzz image is rejected to be mounted by tree-checker, but not
> bad to enhance the check in practice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
> index 1e521db3ef56..54f970f459f5 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
> @@ -1539,7 +1539,7 @@ static int exclude_super_stripes(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
> while (nr--) {
> u64 start, len;
>
> - if (logical[nr] > cache->start + cache->length)
> + if (logical[nr] >= cache->start + cache->length)
> continue;
>
> if (logical[nr] + stripe_len <= cache->start)
>
Is this check necessary at all, since btrfs_rmap_block already contains
a check which ensures the physical address passed is withing the range
of the given chunk, which in turn means all logical addresses derived in
btrfs_rmap_block with:
bytenr = chunk_start + stripe_nr * rmap_len;
will be within this block group?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: block group: do not exclude bytenr adjacent to block group
2019-11-18 9:56 ` Nikolay Borisov
@ 2019-11-20 2:26 ` Su Yue
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Su Yue @ 2019-11-20 2:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nikolay Borisov, damenly.su, linux-btrfs
On 2019/11/18 5:56 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 18.11.19 г. 7:56 ч., damenly.su@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
>>
>> while excluding super stripes from one block group, the logical bytenr
>> should not be excluded if the block group's start + length equals the
>> bytenr since the bytenr is not belong to the block group.
>>
>> This is insipred by same bugous code of btrfs-progs.
>> The fuzz image is rejected to be mounted by tree-checker, but not
>> bad to enhance the check in practice.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
>> ---
>> fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
>> index 1e521db3ef56..54f970f459f5 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
>> @@ -1539,7 +1539,7 @@ static int exclude_super_stripes(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
>> while (nr--) {
>> u64 start, len;
>>
>> - if (logical[nr] > cache->start + cache->length)
>> + if (logical[nr] >= cache->start + cache->length)
>> continue;
>>
>> if (logical[nr] + stripe_len <= cache->start)
>>
>
> Is this check necessary at all, since btrfs_rmap_block already contains
> a check which ensures the physical address passed is withing the range
> of the given chunk, which in turn means all logical addresses derived in
> btrfs_rmap_block with:
>
> bytenr = chunk_start + stripe_nr * rmap_len;
>
> will be within this block group?
>
Yes, you're right. Drop this bad patch.
Got sick, sorry for the late reply.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: block group: do not exclude bytenr adjacent to block group
2019-11-18 5:56 [PATCH] btrfs: block group: do not exclude bytenr adjacent to block group damenly.su
2019-11-18 9:56 ` Nikolay Borisov
@ 2019-11-20 6:50 ` Su Yue
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Su Yue @ 2019-11-20 6:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: damenly.su; +Cc: linux-btrfs
Drop those too, will send new version fixed by another method.
On 2019/11/18 at 13:56, damenly.su@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
>
> while excluding super stripes from one block group, the logical bytenr
> should not be excluded if the block group's start + length equals the
> bytenr since the bytenr is not belong to the block group.
>
> This is insipred by same bugous code of btrfs-progs.
> The fuzz image is rejected to be mounted by tree-checker, but not
> bad to enhance the check in practice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
> index 1e521db3ef56..54f970f459f5 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c
> @@ -1539,7 +1539,7 @@ static int exclude_super_stripes(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
> while (nr--) {
> u64 start, len;
>
> - if (logical[nr] > cache->start + cache->length)
> + if (logical[nr] >= cache->start + cache->length)
> continue;
>
> if (logical[nr] + stripe_len <= cache->start)
> --
> 2.23.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-11-20 6:50 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-11-18 5:56 [PATCH] btrfs: block group: do not exclude bytenr adjacent to block group damenly.su
2019-11-18 9:56 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-20 2:26 ` Su Yue
2019-11-20 6:50 ` Su Yue
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).