| Message ID | 20191222184528.32687-1-amir73il@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | locks: print unsigned ino in /proc/locks | expand |
On Sun, 2019-12-22 at 20:45 +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > An ino is unsigned so export it as such in /proc/locks. > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> > --- > > Hi Jeff, > > Ran into this while writing tests to verify i_ino == d_ino == st_ino on > overlayfs. In some configurations (xino=on) overlayfs sets MSB on i_ino, > so /proc/locks reports negative ino values. > > BTW, the requirement for (i_ino == d_ino) came from nfsd v3 readdirplus. > > Thanks, > Amir. > > fs/locks.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c > index 6970f55daf54..44b6da032842 100644 > --- a/fs/locks.c > +++ b/fs/locks.c > @@ -2853,7 +2853,7 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl, > } > if (inode) { > /* userspace relies on this representation of dev_t */ > - seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%ld ", fl_pid, > + seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%lu ", fl_pid, > MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), > MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), inode->i_ino); > } else { My that is an old bug! I think that goes back to early v2.x days, if not v1.x. I'll queue it up, and maybe we can get this in for v5.6. Thanks!
On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 3:17 AM Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 2019-12-22 at 20:45 +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > An ino is unsigned so export it as such in /proc/locks. > > > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> > > --- > > > > Hi Jeff, > > > > Ran into this while writing tests to verify i_ino == d_ino == st_ino on > > overlayfs. In some configurations (xino=on) overlayfs sets MSB on i_ino, > > so /proc/locks reports negative ino values. > > > > BTW, the requirement for (i_ino == d_ino) came from nfsd v3 readdirplus. > > > > Thanks, > > Amir. > > > > fs/locks.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c > > index 6970f55daf54..44b6da032842 100644 > > --- a/fs/locks.c > > +++ b/fs/locks.c > > @@ -2853,7 +2853,7 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl, > > } > > if (inode) { > > /* userspace relies on this representation of dev_t */ > > - seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%ld ", fl_pid, > > + seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%lu ", fl_pid, > > MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), > > MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), inode->i_ino); > > } else { > > My that is an old bug! I think that goes back to early v2.x days, if not > v1.x. I'll queue it up, and maybe we can get this in for v5.6. I suppose you meant for v5.5? I'd be happy if we can also mark it for stable (sorry I did not). Reason is that I have xfstests depending on it, which test overlay fixes that are marked for stable. Thanks, Amir.
On Mon, 2019-12-23 at 04:58 +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 3:17 AM Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 2019-12-22 at 20:45 +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > An ino is unsigned so export it as such in /proc/locks. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > > > > Hi Jeff, > > > > > > Ran into this while writing tests to verify i_ino == d_ino == st_ino on > > > overlayfs. In some configurations (xino=on) overlayfs sets MSB on i_ino, > > > so /proc/locks reports negative ino values. > > > > > > BTW, the requirement for (i_ino == d_ino) came from nfsd v3 readdirplus. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Amir. > > > > > > fs/locks.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c > > > index 6970f55daf54..44b6da032842 100644 > > > --- a/fs/locks.c > > > +++ b/fs/locks.c > > > @@ -2853,7 +2853,7 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl, > > > } > > > if (inode) { > > > /* userspace relies on this representation of dev_t */ > > > - seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%ld ", fl_pid, > > > + seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%lu ", fl_pid, > > > MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), > > > MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), inode->i_ino); > > > } else { > > > > My that is an old bug! I think that goes back to early v2.x days, if not > > v1.x. I'll queue it up, and maybe we can get this in for v5.6. > > I suppose you meant for v5.5? > I'd be happy if we can also mark it for stable (sorry I did not). > Reason is that I have xfstests depending on it, which test overlay > fixes that are marked for stable. > Oh! I didn't realize the urgency. It's been in -next for a week or so now, so I think it's probably safe enough. I'll send a PR soon, after I give it a bit more testing. Thanks!
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c index 6970f55daf54..44b6da032842 100644 --- a/fs/locks.c +++ b/fs/locks.c @@ -2853,7 +2853,7 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl, } if (inode) { /* userspace relies on this representation of dev_t */ - seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%ld ", fl_pid, + seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%lu ", fl_pid, MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), inode->i_ino); } else {
An ino is unsigned so export it as such in /proc/locks. Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> --- Hi Jeff, Ran into this while writing tests to verify i_ino == d_ino == st_ino on overlayfs. In some configurations (xino=on) overlayfs sets MSB on i_ino, so /proc/locks reports negative ino values. BTW, the requirement for (i_ino == d_ino) came from nfsd v3 readdirplus. Thanks, Amir. fs/locks.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)