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 F325CC4CECE for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:31:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (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 A751C21835 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:31:08 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A751C21835 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-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46sdDV47PKzDqw3 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:31:06 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com (client-ip=45.249.212.255; helo=huawei.com; envelope-from=gaoxiang25@huawei.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Received: from huawei.com (szxga08-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.255]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46sdDK0jrVzDqtV for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:30:53 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.55]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id B199B303795C773596C8; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:30:49 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) by DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.213) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:30:49 +0800 Received: from architecture4 (10.140.130.215) by dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:30:48 +0800 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:33:50 +0800 From: Gao Xiang To: Gao Xiang Subject: Re: [PATCH-v2] erofs-utils:code for calculating crc checksum of erofs blocks. Message-ID: <20191015013349.GA241159@architecture4> References: <20191014145943.2653-1-pratikshinde320@gmail.com> <20191014234504.GA31674@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191014234504.GA31674@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Originating-IP: [10.140.130.215] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggeme710-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.106) To dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-BeenThere: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Linux EROFS file system List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, miaoxie@huawei.com Errors-To: linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linux-erofs" On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 07:45:17AM +0800, Gao Xiang via Linux-erofs wrote: > Hi Pratik, > > Some nitpick comments... Let me know if you have other thoughts > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 08:29:43PM +0530, Pratik Shinde wrote: > > Added code for calculating crc of erofs blocks (4K size).for now it calculates > > checksum of first block. but can modified to calculate crc for any no. of blocks > > > > modified patch based on review comments. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pratik Shinde > > --- > > include/erofs/internal.h | 1 + > > include/erofs/io.h | 8 +++++ > > lib/io.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++ > > mkfs/main.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 4 files changed, 112 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/include/erofs/internal.h b/include/erofs/internal.h > > index 5384946..53335bc 100644 > > --- a/include/erofs/internal.h > > +++ b/include/erofs/internal.h > > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ struct erofs_sb_info { > > u32 feature_incompat; > > u64 build_time; > > u32 build_time_nsec; > > + u32 feature; > > }; Oh, I missed one thing, we need to add another field to on-disk erofs_super_block as well. 21 /* 128-byte erofs on-disk super block */ 22 struct erofs_super_block { 23 __le32 magic; /* file system magic number */ 24 __le32 checksum; /* crc32c(super_block) */ 25 __le32 feature_compat; 26 __u8 blkszbits; /* support block_size == PAGE_SIZE only */ 27 __u8 reserved; 28 29 __le16 root_nid; /* nid of root directory */ 30 __le64 inos; /* total valid ino # (== f_files - f_favail) */ 31 32 __le64 build_time; /* inode v1 time derivation */ 33 __le32 build_time_nsec; /* inode v1 time derivation in nano scale */ 34 __le32 blocks; /* used for statfs */ 35 __le32 meta_blkaddr; /* start block address of metadata area */ 36 __le32 xattr_blkaddr; /* start block address of shared xattr area */ 37 __u8 uuid[16]; /* 128-bit uuid for volume */ 38 __u8 volume_name[16]; /* volume name */ 39 __le32 feature_incompat; __le32 chksum_blocks; In order for kernel to know how many blocks it needs to be checked... 40 41 __u8 reserved2[44]; 42 }; Thanks, Gao Xiang > > > > /* global sbi */ > > diff --git a/include/erofs/io.h b/include/erofs/io.h > > index 9775047..e0ca8d9 100644 > > --- a/include/erofs/io.h > > +++ b/include/erofs/io.h > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ > > int dev_open(const char *devname); > > void dev_close(void); > > int dev_write(const void *buf, u64 offset, size_t len); > > +int dev_read(void *buf, u64 offset, size_t len); > > int dev_fillzero(u64 offset, size_t len, bool padding); > > int dev_fsync(void); > > int dev_resize(erofs_blk_t nblocks); > > @@ -31,5 +32,12 @@ static inline int blk_write(const void *buf, erofs_blk_t blkaddr, > > blknr_to_addr(nblocks)); > > } > > > > +static inline int blk_read(void *buf, erofs_blk_t start, > > + u32 nblocks) > > +{ > > + return dev_read(buf, blknr_to_addr(start), > > + blknr_to_addr(nblocks)); > > +} > > + > > #endif > > > > diff --git a/lib/io.c b/lib/io.c > > index 7f5f94d..52f9424 100644 > > --- a/lib/io.c > > +++ b/lib/io.c > > @@ -207,3 +207,30 @@ int dev_resize(unsigned int blocks) > > return dev_fillzero(st.st_size, length, true); > > } > > > > +int dev_read(void *buf, u64 offset, size_t len) > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + > > + if (cfg.c_dry_run) > > + return 0; > > + > > + if (!buf) { > > + erofs_err("buf is NULL"); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + if (offset >= erofs_devsz || len > erofs_devsz || > > + offset > erofs_devsz - len) { > > + erofs_err("read posion[%" PRIu64 ", %zd] is too large beyond" > > + "the end of device(%" PRIu64 ").", > > + offset, len, erofs_devsz); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + ret = pread64(erofs_devfd, buf, len, (off64_t)offset); > > + if (ret != (int)len) { > > + erofs_err("Failed to read data from device - %s:[%" PRIu64 ", %zd].", > > + erofs_devname, offset, len); > > + return -errno; > > + } > > + return 0; > > +} > > diff --git a/mkfs/main.c b/mkfs/main.c > > index 91a018f..baaf02a 100644 > > --- a/mkfs/main.c > > +++ b/mkfs/main.c > > @@ -22,6 +22,10 @@ > > > > #define EROFS_SUPER_END (EROFS_SUPER_OFFSET + sizeof(struct erofs_super_block)) > > > > +/* number of blocks for calculating checksum */ > > +#define EROFS_CKSUM_BLOCKS 1 > > +#define EROFS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM 0x0001 > > How about Moving EROFS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM to erofs_fs.h since it's > an on-disk definition, > > > + > > static void usage(void) > > { > > fprintf(stderr, "usage: [options] FILE DIRECTORY\n\n"); > > @@ -85,6 +89,10 @@ static int parse_extended_opts(const char *opts) > > return -EINVAL; > > cfg.c_force_inodeversion = FORCE_INODE_EXTENDED; > > } > > + > > + if (MATCH_EXTENTED_OPT("nocrc", token, keylen)) { > > + sbi.feature &= ~EROFS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM; > > + } > > } > > return 0; > > } > > @@ -180,6 +188,7 @@ int erofs_mkfs_update_super_block(struct erofs_buffer_head *bh, > > .meta_blkaddr = sbi.meta_blkaddr, > > .xattr_blkaddr = 0, > > .feature_incompat = cpu_to_le32(sbi.feature_incompat), > > + .checksum = 0 > > }; > > const unsigned int sb_blksize = > > round_up(EROFS_SUPER_END, EROFS_BLKSIZ); > > @@ -202,6 +211,70 @@ int erofs_mkfs_update_super_block(struct erofs_buffer_head *bh, > > return 0; > > } > > > > +#define CRCPOLY 0x82F63B78 > > +static inline u32 crc32c(u32 seed, unsigned char const *in, size_t len) > > +{ > > + int i; > > + u32 crc = seed; > > + > > + while (len--) { > > + crc ^= *in++; > > + for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) { > > + crc = (crc >> 1) ^ ((crc & 1) ? CRCPOLY : 0); > > + } > > + } > > + return crc; > > +} > > + > > +/* calculate checksum for first n blocks */ > > +u32 erofs_calc_blk_checksum(erofs_blk_t nblks, u32 *crc) > > +{ > > + char *buf; > > + int err = 0; > > + > > + buf = malloc(nblks * EROFS_BLKSIZ); > > + err = blk_read(buf, 0, nblks); > > + if (err) { > > + erofs_err("Failed to calculate erofs checksum - %s", > > + erofs_strerror(err)); > > + return err; > > + } > > + *crc = crc32c(0, (const unsigned char *)buf, nblks * EROFS_BLKSIZ); > > + free(buf); > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +void erofs_write_checksum() > > How about naming write_sb_checksum? > My idea is that this is a checksum in super block (rather than > a checksum only for super block [0th block]) > > Let me know if you have another thought... > > > +{ > > + struct erofs_super_block *sb; > > + char buf[EROFS_BLKSIZ]; > > + int ret = 0; > > + u32 crc; > > + > > + ret = erofs_calc_blk_checksum(EROFS_CKSUM_BLOCKS, &crc); > > + if (ret) { > > + return; > > + } > > + ret = blk_read(buf, 0, 1); > > + if (ret) { > > + erofs_err("error reading super-block structure"); > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + sb = (struct erofs_super_block *)((u8 *)buf + EROFS_SUPER_OFFSET); > > + if (le32_to_cpu(sb->magic) != EROFS_SUPER_MAGIC_V1) { > > + erofs_err("not an erofs image"); > > As the previous comments, I am little care about these print messages > since users will only see this and "error reading super-block structure" > "not an erofs image" makes confused for them... (They don't know what > the internal process is doing) > > BTW, it looks good to me as a whole... Do you have some time on > kernel side as well? :) > > Thanks, > Gao Xiang > > > + return; > > + } > > + sb->checksum = cpu_to_le32(crc); > > + ret = blk_write(buf, 0, 1); > > + if (ret) { > > + erofs_err("error writing 0th block to disk - %s", > > + erofs_strerror(ret)); > > + return; > > + } > > +} > > + > > int main(int argc, char **argv) > > { > > int err = 0; > > @@ -217,6 +290,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) > > > > cfg.c_legacy_compress = false; > > sbi.feature_incompat = EROFS_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_LZ4_0PADDING; > > + sbi.feature = EROFS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM; > > > > err = mkfs_parse_options_cfg(argc, argv); > > if (err) { > > @@ -301,6 +375,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) > > err = -EIO; > > else > > err = dev_resize(nblocks); > > + if (sbi.feature & EROFS_FEATURE_SB_CHKSUM) > > + erofs_write_checksum(); > > exit: > > z_erofs_compress_exit(); > > dev_close(); > > -- > > 2.9.3 > >