[PATCHSET v23.1 0/6] xfs: detect mergeable and overlapping btree records

[PATCHSET v23.1 0/6] xfs: detect mergeable and overlapping btree records

[Darrick J. Wong]

Hi all,

While I was doing differential fuzz analysis between xfs_scrub and
xfs_repair, I noticed that xfs_repair was only partially effective at
detecting btree records that can be merged, and xfs_scrub totally didn't
notice at all.

For every interval btree type except for the bmbt, there should never
exist two adjacent records with adjacent keyspaces because the
blockcount field is always large enough to span the entire keyspace of
the domain.  This is because the free space, rmap, and refcount btrees
have a blockcount field large enough to store the maximum AG length, and
there can never be an allocation larger than an AG.

The bmbt is a different story due to its ondisk encoding where the
blockcount is only 21 bits wide.  Because AGs can span up to 2^31 blocks
and the RT volume can span up to 2^52 blocks, a preallocation of 2^22
blocks will be expressed as two records of 2^21 length.  We don't
opportunistically combine records when doing bmbt operations, which is
why the fsck tools have never complained about this scenario.

Offline repair is partially effective at detecting mergeable records
because I taught it to do that for the rmap and refcount btrees.  This
series enhances the free space, rmap, and refcount scrubbers to detect
mergeable records.  For the bmbt, it will flag the file as being
eligible for an optimization to shrink the size of the data structure.

The last patch in this set also enhances the rmap scrubber to detect
records that overlap incorrectly.  This check is done automatically for
non-overlapping btree types, but we have to do it separately for the
rmapbt because there are constraints on which allocation types are
allowed to overlap.

If you're going to start using this mess, you probably ought to just
pull from my git trees, which are linked below.

This is an extraordinary way to destroy everything.  Enjoy!
Comments and questions are, as always, welcome.

--D

kernel git tree:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/djwong/xfs-linux.git/log/?h=scrub-detect-mergeable-records
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/alloc.c    |   31 +++++++++++-
 fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c     |   39 +++++++++++++--
 fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c |   50 +++++++++++++++++++
 fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c     |  126 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 4 files changed, 238 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

[PATCH 1/6] xfs: change bmap scrubber to store the previous mapping

[Darrick J. Wong]

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

Convert the inode data/attr/cow fork scrubber to remember the entire
previous mapping, not just the next expected offset.  No behavior
changes here, but this will enable some better checking in subsequent
patches.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c |   12 +++++++-----
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c
index d310f74fe650..aaa73a2bdd17 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c
@@ -94,7 +94,8 @@ xchk_setup_inode_bmap(
 struct xchk_bmap_info {
 	struct xfs_scrub	*sc;
 	struct xfs_iext_cursor	icur;
-	xfs_fileoff_t		lastoff;
+	struct xfs_bmbt_irec	prev_rec;
+
 	bool			is_rt;
 	bool			is_shared;
 	bool			was_loaded;
@@ -402,7 +403,8 @@ xchk_bmap_iextent(
 	 * Check for out-of-order extents.  This record could have come
 	 * from the incore list, for which there is no ordering check.
 	 */
-	if (irec->br_startoff < info->lastoff)
+	if (irec->br_startoff < info->prev_rec.br_startoff +
+				info->prev_rec.br_blockcount)
 		xchk_fblock_set_corrupt(info->sc, info->whichfork,
 				irec->br_startoff);
 
@@ -703,7 +705,8 @@ xchk_bmap_iextent_delalloc(
 	 * Check for out-of-order extents.  This record could have come
 	 * from the incore list, for which there is no ordering check.
 	 */
-	if (irec->br_startoff < info->lastoff)
+	if (irec->br_startoff < info->prev_rec.br_startoff +
+				info->prev_rec.br_blockcount)
 		xchk_fblock_set_corrupt(info->sc, info->whichfork,
 				irec->br_startoff);
 
@@ -797,7 +800,6 @@ xchk_bmap(
 		goto out;
 
 	/* Scrub extent records. */
-	info.lastoff = 0;
 	ifp = xfs_ifork_ptr(ip, whichfork);
 	for_each_xfs_iext(ifp, &info.icur, &irec) {
 		if (xchk_should_terminate(sc, &error) ||
@@ -814,7 +816,7 @@ xchk_bmap(
 			xchk_bmap_iextent_delalloc(ip, &info, &irec);
 		else
 			xchk_bmap_iextent(ip, &info, &irec);
-		info.lastoff = irec.br_startoff + irec.br_blockcount;
+		memcpy(&info.prev_rec, &irec, sizeof(struct xfs_bmbt_irec));
 	}
 
 	error = xchk_bmap_check_rmaps(sc, whichfork);

[PATCH 6/6] xfs: check for reverse mapping records that could be merged

[Darrick J. Wong]

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

Enhance the rmap scrubber to flag adjacent records that could be merged.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c |   52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c
index efb13a21afbc..76ac2279e37d 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c
@@ -39,6 +39,12 @@ struct xchk_rmap {
 	 * allocations that cannot be shared.
 	 */
 	struct xfs_rmap_irec	overlap_rec;
+
+	/*
+	 * The previous rmapbt record, so that we can check for two records
+	 * that could be one.
+	 */
+	struct xfs_rmap_irec	prev_rec;
 };
 
 /* Cross-reference a rmap against the refcount btree. */
@@ -146,6 +152,51 @@ xchk_rmapbt_check_overlapping(
 	memcpy(&cr->overlap_rec, irec, sizeof(struct xfs_rmap_irec));
 }
 
+/* Decide if two reverse-mapping records can be merged. */
+static inline bool
+xchk_rmap_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_rmap		*cr,
+	const struct xfs_rmap_irec	*r2)
+{
+	const struct xfs_rmap_irec	*r1 = &cr->prev_rec;
+
+	/* Ignore if prev_rec is not yet initialized. */
+	if (cr->prev_rec.rm_blockcount == 0)
+		return false;
+
+	if (r1->rm_owner != r2->rm_owner)
+		return false;
+	if (r1->rm_startblock + r1->rm_blockcount != r2->rm_startblock)
+		return false;
+	if ((unsigned long long)r1->rm_blockcount + r2->rm_blockcount >
+	    XFS_RMAP_LEN_MAX)
+		return false;
+	if (XFS_RMAP_NON_INODE_OWNER(r2->rm_owner))
+		return true;
+	/* must be an inode owner below here */
+	if (r1->rm_flags != r2->rm_flags)
+		return false;
+	if (r1->rm_flags & XFS_RMAP_BMBT_BLOCK)
+		return true;
+	return r1->rm_offset + r1->rm_blockcount == r2->rm_offset;
+}
+
+/* Flag failures for records that could be merged. */
+STATIC void
+xchk_rmapbt_check_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_btree		*bs,
+	struct xchk_rmap		*cr,
+	const struct xfs_rmap_irec	*irec)
+{
+	if (bs->sc->sm->sm_flags & XFS_SCRUB_OFLAG_CORRUPT)
+		return;
+
+	if (xchk_rmap_mergeable(cr, irec))
+		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
+
+	memcpy(&cr->prev_rec, irec, sizeof(struct xfs_rmap_irec));
+}
+
 /* Scrub an rmapbt record. */
 STATIC int
 xchk_rmapbt_rec(
@@ -218,6 +269,7 @@ xchk_rmapbt_rec(
 			xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
 	}
 
+	xchk_rmapbt_check_mergeable(bs, cr, &irec);
 	xchk_rmapbt_check_overlapping(bs, cr, &irec);
 	xchk_rmapbt_xref(bs->sc, &irec);
 out:

[PATCH 5/6] xfs: check overlapping rmap btree records

[Darrick J. Wong]

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

The rmap btree scrubber doesn't contain sufficient checking for records
that cannot overlap but do anyway.  For the other btrees, this is
enforced by the inorder checks in xchk_btree_rec, but the rmap btree is
special because it allows overlapping records to handle shared data
extents.

Therefore, enhance the rmap btree record check function to compare each
record against the previous one so that we can detect overlapping rmap
records for space allocations that do not allow sharing.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c |   74 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c
index ba8d073b3954..efb13a21afbc 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c
@@ -32,6 +32,15 @@ xchk_setup_ag_rmapbt(
 
 /* Reverse-mapping scrubber. */
 
+struct xchk_rmap {
+	/*
+	 * The furthest-reaching of the rmapbt records that we've already
+	 * processed.  This enables us to detect overlapping records for space
+	 * allocations that cannot be shared.
+	 */
+	struct xfs_rmap_irec	overlap_rec;
+};
+
 /* Cross-reference a rmap against the refcount btree. */
 STATIC void
 xchk_rmapbt_xref_refc(
@@ -87,6 +96,56 @@ xchk_rmapbt_xref(
 		xchk_rmapbt_xref_refc(sc, irec);
 }
 
+static inline bool
+xchk_rmapbt_is_shareable(
+	struct xfs_scrub		*sc,
+	const struct xfs_rmap_irec	*irec)
+{
+	if (!xfs_has_reflink(sc->mp))
+		return false;
+	if (XFS_RMAP_NON_INODE_OWNER(irec->rm_owner))
+		return false;
+	if (irec->rm_flags & (XFS_RMAP_BMBT_BLOCK | XFS_RMAP_ATTR_FORK |
+			      XFS_RMAP_UNWRITTEN))
+		return false;
+	return true;
+}
+
+/* Flag failures for records that overlap but cannot. */
+STATIC void
+xchk_rmapbt_check_overlapping(
+	struct xchk_btree		*bs,
+	struct xchk_rmap		*cr,
+	const struct xfs_rmap_irec	*irec)
+{
+	xfs_agblock_t			pnext, inext;
+
+	if (bs->sc->sm->sm_flags & XFS_SCRUB_OFLAG_CORRUPT)
+		return;
+
+	/* No previous record? */
+	if (cr->overlap_rec.rm_blockcount == 0)
+		goto set_prev;
+
+	/* Do overlap_rec and irec overlap? */
+	pnext = cr->overlap_rec.rm_startblock + cr->overlap_rec.rm_blockcount;
+	if (pnext <= irec->rm_startblock)
+		goto set_prev;
+
+	/* Overlap is only allowed if both records are data fork mappings. */
+	if (!xchk_rmapbt_is_shareable(bs->sc, &cr->overlap_rec) ||
+	    !xchk_rmapbt_is_shareable(bs->sc, irec))
+		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
+
+	/* Save whichever rmap record extends furthest. */
+	inext = irec->rm_startblock + irec->rm_blockcount;
+	if (pnext > inext)
+		return;
+
+set_prev:
+	memcpy(&cr->overlap_rec, irec, sizeof(struct xfs_rmap_irec));
+}
+
 /* Scrub an rmapbt record. */
 STATIC int
 xchk_rmapbt_rec(
@@ -94,6 +153,7 @@ xchk_rmapbt_rec(
 	const union xfs_btree_rec *rec)
 {
 	struct xfs_mount	*mp = bs->cur->bc_mp;
+	struct xchk_rmap	*cr = bs->private;
 	struct xfs_rmap_irec	irec;
 	struct xfs_perag	*pag = bs->cur->bc_ag.pag;
 	bool			non_inode;
@@ -158,6 +218,7 @@ xchk_rmapbt_rec(
 			xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
 	}
 
+	xchk_rmapbt_check_overlapping(bs, cr, &irec);
 	xchk_rmapbt_xref(bs->sc, &irec);
 out:
 	return error;
@@ -168,8 +229,17 @@ int
 xchk_rmapbt(
 	struct xfs_scrub	*sc)
 {
-	return xchk_btree(sc, sc->sa.rmap_cur, xchk_rmapbt_rec,
-			&XFS_RMAP_OINFO_AG, NULL);
+	struct xchk_rmap	*cr;
+	int			error;
+
+	cr = kzalloc(sizeof(struct xchk_rmap), XCHK_GFP_FLAGS);
+	if (!cr)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	error = xchk_btree(sc, sc->sa.rmap_cur, xchk_rmapbt_rec,
+			&XFS_RMAP_OINFO_AG, cr);
+	kfree(cr);
+	return error;
 }
 
 /* xref check that the extent is owned only by a given owner */

[PATCH 3/6] xfs: flag free space btree records that could be merged

[Darrick J. Wong]

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

Complain if we encounter free space btree records that could be merged.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/alloc.c |   31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/alloc.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/alloc.c
index 0cd20d998368..de4b7c34275a 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/alloc.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/alloc.c
@@ -31,6 +31,13 @@ xchk_setup_ag_allocbt(
 }
 
 /* Free space btree scrubber. */
+
+struct xchk_alloc {
+	/* Previous free space extent. */
+	xfs_agblock_t		prev_bno;
+	xfs_extlen_t		prev_len;
+};
+
 /*
  * Ensure there's a corresponding cntbt/bnobt record matching this
  * bnobt/cntbt record, respectively.
@@ -91,6 +98,25 @@ xchk_allocbt_xref(
 	xchk_xref_is_not_cow_staging(sc, agbno, len);
 }
 
+/* Flag failures for records that could be merged. */
+STATIC void
+xchk_allocbt_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_btree	*bs,
+	struct xchk_alloc	*ca,
+	xfs_agblock_t		bno,
+	xfs_extlen_t		len)
+{
+	if (bs->sc->sm->sm_flags & XFS_SCRUB_OFLAG_CORRUPT)
+		return;
+
+	if (ca->prev_len > 0 && ca->prev_bno + ca->prev_len == bno &&
+	    ca->prev_len + len < (uint32_t)~0U)
+		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
+
+	ca->prev_bno = bno;
+	ca->prev_len = len;
+}
+
 /* Scrub a bnobt/cntbt record. */
 STATIC int
 xchk_allocbt_rec(
@@ -98,6 +124,7 @@ xchk_allocbt_rec(
 	const union xfs_btree_rec *rec)
 {
 	struct xfs_perag	*pag = bs->cur->bc_ag.pag;
+	struct xchk_alloc	*ca = bs->private;
 	xfs_agblock_t		bno;
 	xfs_extlen_t		len;
 
@@ -109,6 +136,7 @@ xchk_allocbt_rec(
 	    !xfs_verify_agbno(pag, bno + len - 1))
 		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
 
+	xchk_allocbt_mergeable(bs, ca, bno, len);
 	xchk_allocbt_xref(bs->sc, bno, len);
 
 	return 0;
@@ -120,10 +148,11 @@ xchk_allocbt(
 	struct xfs_scrub	*sc,
 	xfs_btnum_t		which)
 {
+	struct xchk_alloc	ca = { .prev_len = 0 };
 	struct xfs_btree_cur	*cur;
 
 	cur = which == XFS_BTNUM_BNO ? sc->sa.bno_cur : sc->sa.cnt_cur;
-	return xchk_btree(sc, cur, xchk_allocbt_rec, &XFS_RMAP_OINFO_AG, NULL);
+	return xchk_btree(sc, cur, xchk_allocbt_rec, &XFS_RMAP_OINFO_AG, &ca);
 }
 
 int

[PATCH 2/6] xfs: alert the user about data/attr fork mappings that could be merged

[Darrick J. Wong]

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

If the data or attr forks have mappings that could be merged, let the
user know that the structure could be optimized.  This isn't a
filesystem corruption since the regular filesystem does not try to be
smart about merging bmbt records.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c
index aaa73a2bdd17..0f5d7fb61ca1 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c
@@ -390,6 +390,29 @@ xchk_bmap_dirattr_extent(
 		xchk_fblock_set_corrupt(info->sc, info->whichfork, off);
 }
 
+/* Are these two mappings mergeable? */
+static inline bool
+xchk_bmap_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_bmap_info		*info,
+	const struct xfs_bmbt_irec	*b2)
+{
+	const struct xfs_bmbt_irec	*b1 = &info->prev_rec;
+
+	/* Skip uninitialized prev_rec and COW fork extents */
+	if (b1->br_blockcount == 0)
+		return false;
+	if (info->whichfork == XFS_COW_FORK)
+		return false;
+
+	if (b1->br_startoff + b1->br_blockcount != b2->br_startoff)
+		return false;
+	if (b1->br_startblock + b1->br_blockcount != b2->br_startblock)
+		return false;
+	if (b1->br_blockcount + b2->br_blockcount > BMBT_BLOCKCOUNT_MASK)
+		return false;
+	return b1->br_state == b2->br_state;
+}
+
 /* Scrub a single extent record. */
 STATIC void
 xchk_bmap_iextent(
@@ -441,6 +464,10 @@ xchk_bmap_iextent(
 	if (info->sc->sm->sm_flags & XFS_SCRUB_OFLAG_CORRUPT)
 		return;
 
+	/* Notify the user of mergeable records in the data/attr forks. */
+	if (xchk_bmap_mergeable(info, irec))
+		xchk_ino_set_preen(info->sc, info->sc->ip->i_ino);
+
 	if (info->is_rt)
 		xchk_bmap_rt_iextent_xref(ip, info, irec);
 	else

[PATCH 4/6] xfs: flag refcount btree records that could be merged

[Darrick J. Wong]

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

Complain if we encounter refcount btree records that could be merged.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c |   50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c
index 2009efea923c..8282cabd630c 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c
@@ -333,6 +333,9 @@ xchk_refcountbt_xref(
 }
 
 struct xchk_refcbt_records {
+	/* Previous refcount record. */
+	struct xfs_refcount_irec prev_rec;
+
 	/* The next AG block where we aren't expecting shared extents. */
 	xfs_agblock_t		next_unshared_agbno;
 
@@ -387,6 +390,52 @@ xchk_refcountbt_xref_gaps(
 		xchk_should_check_xref(sc, &error, &sc->sa.rmap_cur);
 }
 
+static inline bool
+xchk_refcount_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_refcbt_records	*rrc,
+	const struct xfs_refcount_irec	*r2)
+{
+	const struct xfs_refcount_irec	*r1 = &rrc->prev_rec;
+
+	/* Ignore if prev_rec is not yet initialized. */
+	if (r1->rc_blockcount > 0)
+		return false;
+
+	if (r1->rc_startblock + r1->rc_blockcount != r2->rc_startblock)
+		return false;
+	if (r1->rc_refcount != r2->rc_refcount)
+		return false;
+	if ((unsigned long long)r1->rc_blockcount + r2->rc_blockcount >
+			MAXREFCEXTLEN)
+		return false;
+
+	return true;
+}
+
+/* Flag failures for records that could be merged. */
+STATIC void
+xchk_refcountbt_check_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_btree		*bs,
+	struct xchk_refcbt_records	*rrc,
+	xfs_agblock_t			bno,
+	xfs_extlen_t			len,
+	xfs_nlink_t			refcount)
+{
+	struct xfs_refcount_irec	irec = {
+		.rc_startblock		= bno,
+		.rc_blockcount		= len,
+		.rc_refcount		= refcount,
+	};
+
+	if (bs->sc->sm->sm_flags & XFS_SCRUB_OFLAG_CORRUPT)
+		return;
+
+	if (xchk_refcount_mergeable(rrc, &irec))
+		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
+
+	memcpy(&rrc->prev_rec, &irec, sizeof(struct xfs_refcount_irec));
+}
+
 /* Scrub a refcountbt record. */
 STATIC int
 xchk_refcountbt_rec(
@@ -421,6 +470,7 @@ xchk_refcountbt_rec(
 	if (refcount == 0)
 		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
 
+	xchk_refcountbt_check_mergeable(bs, rrc, bno, len, refcount);
 	xchk_refcountbt_xref(bs->sc, bno, len, refcount);
 
 	/*

[PATCHSET v24.0 0/6] xfs: detect mergeable and overlapping btree records

[Darrick J. Wong]

Hi all,

While I was doing differential fuzz analysis between xfs_scrub and
xfs_repair, I noticed that xfs_repair was only partially effective at
detecting btree records that can be merged, and xfs_scrub totally didn't
notice at all.

For every interval btree type except for the bmbt, there should never
exist two adjacent records with adjacent keyspaces because the
blockcount field is always large enough to span the entire keyspace of
the domain.  This is because the free space, rmap, and refcount btrees
have a blockcount field large enough to store the maximum AG length, and
there can never be an allocation larger than an AG.

The bmbt is a different story due to its ondisk encoding where the
blockcount is only 21 bits wide.  Because AGs can span up to 2^31 blocks
and the RT volume can span up to 2^52 blocks, a preallocation of 2^22
blocks will be expressed as two records of 2^21 length.  We don't
opportunistically combine records when doing bmbt operations, which is
why the fsck tools have never complained about this scenario.

Offline repair is partially effective at detecting mergeable records
because I taught it to do that for the rmap and refcount btrees.  This
series enhances the free space, rmap, and refcount scrubbers to detect
mergeable records.  For the bmbt, it will flag the file as being
eligible for an optimization to shrink the size of the data structure.

The last patch in this set also enhances the rmap scrubber to detect
records that overlap incorrectly.  This check is done automatically for
non-overlapping btree types, but we have to do it separately for the
rmapbt because there are constraints on which allocation types are
allowed to overlap.

If you're going to start using this mess, you probably ought to just
pull from my git trees, which are linked below.

This is an extraordinary way to destroy everything.  Enjoy!
Comments and questions are, as always, welcome.

--D

kernel git tree:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/djwong/xfs-linux.git/log/?h=scrub-detect-mergeable-records
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/alloc.c    |   29 ++++++++++-
 fs/xfs/scrub/bmap.c     |   39 +++++++++++++--
 fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c |   44 ++++++++++++++++
 fs/xfs/scrub/rmap.c     |  126 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 4 files changed, 230 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

[PATCH 4/6] xfs: flag refcount btree records that could be merged

[Darrick J. Wong]

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

Complain if we encounter refcount btree records that could be merged.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c |   44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)


diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c
index e99c1e1246f8..9d957d2df3e1 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/refcount.c
@@ -333,6 +333,9 @@ xchk_refcountbt_xref(
 }
 
 struct xchk_refcbt_records {
+	/* Previous refcount record. */
+	struct xfs_refcount_irec prev_rec;
+
 	/* The next AG block where we aren't expecting shared extents. */
 	xfs_agblock_t		next_unshared_agbno;
 
@@ -390,6 +393,46 @@ xchk_refcountbt_xref_gaps(
 		xchk_should_check_xref(sc, &error, &sc->sa.rmap_cur);
 }
 
+static inline bool
+xchk_refcount_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_refcbt_records	*rrc,
+	const struct xfs_refcount_irec	*r2)
+{
+	const struct xfs_refcount_irec	*r1 = &rrc->prev_rec;
+
+	/* Ignore if prev_rec is not yet initialized. */
+	if (r1->rc_blockcount > 0)
+		return false;
+
+	if (r1->rc_domain != r2->rc_domain)
+		return false;
+	if (r1->rc_startblock + r1->rc_blockcount != r2->rc_startblock)
+		return false;
+	if (r1->rc_refcount != r2->rc_refcount)
+		return false;
+	if ((unsigned long long)r1->rc_blockcount + r2->rc_blockcount >
+			MAXREFCEXTLEN)
+		return false;
+
+	return true;
+}
+
+/* Flag failures for records that could be merged. */
+STATIC void
+xchk_refcountbt_check_mergeable(
+	struct xchk_btree		*bs,
+	struct xchk_refcbt_records	*rrc,
+	const struct xfs_refcount_irec	*irec)
+{
+	if (bs->sc->sm->sm_flags & XFS_SCRUB_OFLAG_CORRUPT)
+		return;
+
+	if (xchk_refcount_mergeable(rrc, irec))
+		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
+
+	memcpy(&rrc->prev_rec, irec, sizeof(struct xfs_refcount_irec));
+}
+
 /* Scrub a refcountbt record. */
 STATIC int
 xchk_refcountbt_rec(
@@ -414,6 +457,7 @@ xchk_refcountbt_rec(
 		xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
 	rrc->prev_domain = irec.rc_domain;
 
+	xchk_refcountbt_check_mergeable(bs, rrc, &irec);
 	xchk_refcountbt_xref(bs->sc, &irec);
 
 	/*