| Message ID | 20160907025419.23284-1-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 10:54:19AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Commit 93dabf211d74daf6e3de642bdd887a90a00f7b49 > Author: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> > Date: Fri Jun 17 13:37:48 2016 -0700 > > btrfs-progs: check: verify qgroups above level 0 > > This commit introduced a new regression which corrupts > read_qgroup_status, since it iterate leaf with manually specified slot, > not correct path->slot[0]. > > This leads to wrong slot[0] and read_qgroup_status() will read out wrong > flags, leading to regression. > > Fix read_qgroup_status() by using eb and slot instread of wrong path > strucutre. > > Reported-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> > Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> I'm adding this patch to devel. Do you have a test for the regression please? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
At 09/30/2016 01:19 AM, David Sterba wrote: > On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 10:54:19AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> Commit 93dabf211d74daf6e3de642bdd887a90a00f7b49 >> Author: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> >> Date: Fri Jun 17 13:37:48 2016 -0700 >> >> btrfs-progs: check: verify qgroups above level 0 >> >> This commit introduced a new regression which corrupts >> read_qgroup_status, since it iterate leaf with manually specified slot, >> not correct path->slot[0]. >> >> This leads to wrong slot[0] and read_qgroup_status() will read out wrong >> flags, leading to regression. >> >> Fix read_qgroup_status() by using eb and slot instread of wrong path >> strucutre. >> >> Reported-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> >> Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> > > I'm adding this patch to devel. Do you have a test for the regression please? > > Xfstests btrfs/114 can produce it. If you mean to add btrfs-progs test case, then I can try to create a minimal image to reproduce it. Thanks, Qu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 08:44:58AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > At 09/30/2016 01:19 AM, David Sterba wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 10:54:19AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > >> Commit 93dabf211d74daf6e3de642bdd887a90a00f7b49 > >> Author: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> > >> Date: Fri Jun 17 13:37:48 2016 -0700 > >> > >> btrfs-progs: check: verify qgroups above level 0 > >> > >> This commit introduced a new regression which corrupts > >> read_qgroup_status, since it iterate leaf with manually specified slot, > >> not correct path->slot[0]. > >> > >> This leads to wrong slot[0] and read_qgroup_status() will read out wrong > >> flags, leading to regression. > >> > >> Fix read_qgroup_status() by using eb and slot instread of wrong path > >> strucutre. > >> > >> Reported-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> > >> Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> > >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > I'm adding this patch to devel. Do you have a test for the regression please? > > > > > Xfstests btrfs/114 can produce it. Good. > If you mean to add btrfs-progs test case, then I can try to create a > minimal image to reproduce it. Yes please. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/qgroup-verify.c b/qgroup-verify.c index 66eb870..f6df12d 100644 --- a/qgroup-verify.c +++ b/qgroup-verify.c @@ -874,15 +874,14 @@ static int add_qgroup_relation(u64 memberid, u64 parentid) return 0; } -static void read_qgroup_status(struct btrfs_path *path, +static void read_qgroup_status(struct extent_buffer *eb, int slot, struct counts_tree *counts) { struct btrfs_qgroup_status_item *status_item; u64 flags; - status_item = btrfs_item_ptr(path->nodes[0], path->slots[0], - struct btrfs_qgroup_status_item); - flags = btrfs_qgroup_status_flags(path->nodes[0], status_item); + status_item = btrfs_item_ptr(eb, slot, struct btrfs_qgroup_status_item); + flags = btrfs_qgroup_status_flags(eb, status_item); /* * Since qgroup_inconsist/rescan_running is just one bit, * assign value directly won't work. @@ -946,7 +945,7 @@ loop: } if (key.type == BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_KEY) { - read_qgroup_status(&path, &counts); + read_qgroup_status(leaf, i, &counts); continue; }
Commit 93dabf211d74daf6e3de642bdd887a90a00f7b49 Author: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> Date: Fri Jun 17 13:37:48 2016 -0700 btrfs-progs: check: verify qgroups above level 0 This commit introduced a new regression which corrupts read_qgroup_status, since it iterate leaf with manually specified slot, not correct path->slot[0]. This leads to wrong slot[0] and read_qgroup_status() will read out wrong flags, leading to regression. Fix read_qgroup_status() by using eb and slot instread of wrong path strucutre. Reported-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> --- qgroup-verify.c | 9 ++++----- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)