summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/cmds-check.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* btrfs-progs: Refactor btrfs_check_chunk_valid to use btrfs_fs_infoQu Wenruo2017-07-12
| | | | | Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: Refactor btrfs_readahead_tree_block to use btrfs_fs_infoQu Wenruo2017-07-12
| | | | | Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: Refactor btrfs_find_tree_block to use btrfs_fs_infoQu Wenruo2017-07-12
| | | | | Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: Refactor read_extent_data to use btrfs_fs_infoQu Wenruo2017-07-12
| | | | | Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: Refactor btrfs_num_copies to use btrfs_fs_infoQu Wenruo2017-07-12
| | | | | Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: Refactor btrfs_map_block and its variants to use btrfs_fs_infoQu Wenruo2017-07-12
| | | | | | | | | Just to keep the 1st paramter the same as kernel. We can also save a few lines since the parameter is shorter now. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: lowmem check: Fix false alert on missing chunk or dev extentQu Wenruo2017-07-03
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When checking chunk or dev extent, lowmem mode uses chunk length as dev extent length, and if they mismatch, report missing chunk or dev extent like: ------ ERROR: chunk[256 4324327424) stripe 0 did not find the related dev extent ERROR: chunk[256 4324327424) stripe 1 did not find the related dev extent ERROR: chunk[256 4324327424) stripe 2 did not find the related dev extent ------ However, only for Single/DUP/RAID1 profiles chunk length is the same as dev extent length. For other profiles, this will cause tons of false alert. Fix it by using correct stripe length when checking chunk and dev extent items. This fixes the mkfs test failure when using lowmem mode check. Reported-by: Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Reuse btrfs_check_chunk_valid in lowmem modeQu Wenruo2017-07-03
| | | | | | | | | | | | Before this patch, btrfs check lowmem mode manually checks found chunk item, even we already have the generic chunk validation checker, btrfs_check_chunk_valid(). This patch will use btrfs_check_chunk_valid() to replace open-coded chunk validation checker in check_chunk_item(). Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: Refactor read_tree_block to get rid of btrfs_rootQu Wenruo2017-07-03
| | | | | | | | | | | | | The only reasom read_tree_block() needs a btrfs_root parameter is to get its node/sector size. And long ago, I have already introduced a compactible interface, read_tree_block_fs_info() to pass btrfs_fs_info instead of btrfs_root. Since we have cleaned up all root->sector/node/stripesize users, we should be OK to refactor read_tree_block() function. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
* btrfs-progs: Refactor block sizes users in cmds-check.cQu Wenruo2017-07-03
| | | | Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
* btrfs-progs: lowmem check: Fix false alert about file extent interruptLu Fengqi2017-06-26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | As Qu mentioned in this thread (https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg64469.html), compression can cause regular extent to co-exist with an inlined extent. This coexistence makes things confusing. Since it is currently allowed and can appear in a filesystem, fix btrfsck to prevent a bunch of error reports to appear that will make user feel uneasy. When checking a file extent, record the extent_end of the regular extent to check if there is a gap between the regular extents. Normally there is only one inlined extent, so the extent_end of inlined extent is useless. However, if a regular extent can co-exist with an inlined extent, the extent_end of the inlined extent also needs to be recorded. Reported-by: Marc MERLIN <marc@merlins.org> Signed-off-by: Lu Fengqi <lufq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Fix false alert about EXTENT_DATA that shouldn't be a holeQu Wenruo2017-06-26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Since the incompat feature NO_HOLES still allows us to have an explicit hole file extent, current check is too strict and will cause false alerts like: root 5 EXTENT_DATA[257, 0] shouldn't be hole Fix it by removing the strict file hole extent check. Link: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg66374.html Reported-by: Henk Slager <eye1tm@gmail.com> Tested-by: Henk Slager <eye1tm@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Avoid reading beyond item boundary for dir_item and ↵Qu Wenruo2017-05-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | dir_index When reading out name from inode_ref, it's possible that corrupted name_len can lead to read beyond boundary of item or even extent buffer. This happens when checking fuzzed image /tmp/bko-161811.raw, for both lowmem mode and original mode. Below is the example from lowmem mode. ERROR: root 5 INODE REF[256 256] doesn't have related DIR_INDEX[256 216172782113783808] namelen 255 filename bar filetype 0 ERROR: root 5 INODE REF[256 256] doesn't have related DIR_ITEM[256 1306590535] namelen 255 filename bar filetype 0 WARNING: root 5 INODE[256] mode 0 shouldn't have DIR_INDEX[256 1167283096] WARNING: root 5 DIR_ITEM[256 1167283096] name too long ==13013== Invalid read of size 1 ==13013== at 0x4C31A38: memmove (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==13013== by 0x431518: read_extent_buffer (extent_io.c:863) ==13013== by 0x4752AB: check_dir_item (cmds-check.c:4627) ==13013== by 0x475E5C: check_inode_item (cmds-check.c:4911) ==13013== by 0x476200: check_fs_first_inode (cmds-check.c:5011) ==13013== by 0x476276: check_fs_root_v2 (cmds-check.c:5044) ==13013== by 0x4769FB: check_fs_roots_v2 (cmds-check.c:5242) ==13013== by 0x488B5B: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13033) ==13013== by 0x40A8C5: main (btrfs.c:246) ==13013== Address 0x5c95b80 is 0 bytes after a block of size 4,224 alloc'd ==13013== at 0x4C2CF35: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==13013== by 0x4307E0: __alloc_extent_buffer (extent_io.c:538) ==13013== by 0x430C37: alloc_extent_buffer (extent_io.c:642) ==13013== by 0x413DFE: btrfs_find_create_tree_block (disk-io.c:193) ==13013== by 0x414370: read_tree_block_fs_info (disk-io.c:340) ==13013== by 0x40B5D5: read_tree_block (disk-io.h:125) ==13013== by 0x40CFD2: read_node_slot (ctree.c:652) ==13013== by 0x40E5EB: btrfs_search_slot (ctree.c:1172) ==13013== by 0x4761A8: check_fs_first_inode (cmds-check.c:5001) ==13013== by 0x476276: check_fs_root_v2 (cmds-check.c:5044) ==13013== by 0x4769FB: check_fs_roots_v2 (cmds-check.c:5242) ==13013== by 0x488B5B: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13033) Fix it by double checking dir_item, name_len against item boundary before trying to read out name from extent buffer, for both original mode and lowmem mode. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Avoid reading beyond item boundary for inode_refQu Wenruo2017-05-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When reading out name from inode_ref, it's possible that corrupted name_len can lead to read beyond boundary of item or even extent buffer. This happens when checking fuzzed image /tmp/bko-161811.raw, for both lowmem mode and original mode. ERROR: root 5 INODE REF[256 256] doesn't have related DIR_INDEX[256 504403158265495680] namelen 0 filename filetype 0 ERROR: root 5 INODE REF[256 256] doesn't have related DIR_ITEM[256 4294967294] namelen 0 filename filetype 0 WARNING: root 5 INODE_REF[256 256] name too long ==13022== Invalid read of size 8 ==13022== at 0x4C319BE: memmove (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==13022== by 0x431518: read_extent_buffer (extent_io.c:863) ==13022== by 0x474730: check_inode_ref (cmds-check.c:4307) ==13022== by 0x475D65: check_inode_item (cmds-check.c:4890) ==13022== by 0x476200: check_fs_first_inode (cmds-check.c:5011) ==13022== by 0x476276: check_fs_root_v2 (cmds-check.c:5044) ==13022== by 0x4769FB: check_fs_roots_v2 (cmds-check.c:5242) ==13022== by 0x488B5B: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13033) ==13022== by 0x40A8C5: main (btrfs.c:246) ==13022== Address 0x5c96780 is 0 bytes after a block of size 4,224 alloc'd ==13022== at 0x4C2CF35: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==13022== by 0x4307E0: __alloc_extent_buffer (extent_io.c:538) ==13022== by 0x430C37: alloc_extent_buffer (extent_io.c:642) ==13022== by 0x413DFE: btrfs_find_create_tree_block (disk-io.c:193) ==13022== by 0x414370: read_tree_block_fs_info (disk-io.c:340) ==13022== by 0x40B5D5: read_tree_block (disk-io.h:125) ==13022== by 0x40CFD2: read_node_slot (ctree.c:652) ==13022== by 0x40E5EB: btrfs_search_slot (ctree.c:1172) ==13022== by 0x4761A8: check_fs_first_inode (cmds-check.c:5001) ==13022== by 0x476276: check_fs_root_v2 (cmds-check.c:5044) ==13022== by 0x4769FB: check_fs_roots_v2 (cmds-check.c:5242) ==13022== by 0x488B5B: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13033) = Fix it by double checking inode_ref, name_len against item boundary before trying to read out name from extent buffer, for both original mode and lowmem mode. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Fix heap use after freeSu Yue2017-05-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | fsck/004-no-dir-index makes valgrinds complaining about Invalid read. ==31890== Invalid read of size 1 ==31890== at 0x453D09: repair_inode_backrefs (cmds-check.c:2690) ==31890== by 0x453D09: check_inode_recs (cmds-check.c:3330) ==31890== by 0x453D09: check_fs_root (cmds-check.c:4012) ==31890== by 0x45E788: check_fs_roots (cmds-check.c:4098) ==31890== by 0x45E788: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13031) ==31890== by 0x40A88A: main (btrfs.c:246) ==31890== Address 0x5cb7b90 is 16 bytes inside a block of size 50 free'd ==31890== at 0x4C2C14B: free (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==31890== by 0x453D08: repair_inode_backrefs (cmds-check.c:2684) ==31890== by 0x453D08: check_inode_recs (cmds-check.c:3330) ==31890== by 0x453D08: check_fs_root (cmds-check.c:4012) ==31890== by 0x45E788: check_fs_roots (cmds-check.c:4098) ==31890== by 0x45E788: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13031) ==31890== by 0x40A88A: main (btrfs.c:246) ==31890== Block was alloc'd at ==31890== at 0x4C2AF1F: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==31890== by 0x45055C: get_inode_backref (cmds-check.c:1075) ==31890== by 0x45055C: add_inode_backref (cmds-check.c:1097) ==31890== by 0x45180C: process_dir_item (cmds-check.c:1525) ==31890== by 0x45180C: process_one_leaf (cmds-check.c:1838) ==31890== by 0x45180C: walk_down_tree (cmds-check.c:2134) ==31890== by 0x45180C: check_fs_root (cmds-check.c:3957) ==31890== by 0x45E788: check_fs_roots (cmds-check.c:4098) ==31890== by 0x45E788: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13031) ==31890== by 0x40A88A: main (btrfs.c:246) ==31890== ==31890== Invalid read of size 8 ==31890== at 0x452D66: repair_inode_backrefs (cmds-check.c:2731) ==31890== by 0x452D66: check_inode_recs (cmds-check.c:3330) ==31890== by 0x452D66: check_fs_root (cmds-check.c:4012) ==31890== by 0x45E788: check_fs_roots (cmds-check.c:4098) ==31890== by 0x45E788: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13031) ==31890== by 0x40A88A: main (btrfs.c:246) ==31890== Address 0x5cb7b90 is 16 bytes inside a block of size 50 free'd ==31890== at 0x4C2C14B: free (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==31890== by 0x453D08: repair_inode_backrefs (cmds-check.c:2684) ==31890== by 0x453D08: check_inode_recs (cmds-check.c:3330) ==31890== by 0x453D08: check_fs_root (cmds-check.c:4012) ==31890== by 0x45E788: check_fs_roots (cmds-check.c:4098) ==31890== by 0x45E788: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13031) ==31890== by 0x40A88A: main (btrfs.c:246) ==31890== Block was alloc'd at ==31890== at 0x4C2AF1F: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==31890== by 0x45055C: get_inode_backref (cmds-check.c:1075) ==31890== by 0x45055C: add_inode_backref (cmds-check.c:1097) ==31890== by 0x45180C: process_dir_item (cmds-check.c:1525) ==31890== by 0x45180C: process_one_leaf (cmds-check.c:1838) ==31890== by 0x45180C: walk_down_tree (cmds-check.c:2134) ==31890== by 0x45180C: check_fs_root (cmds-check.c:3957) ==31890== by 0x45E788: check_fs_roots (cmds-check.c:4098) ==31890== by 0x45E788: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:13031) ==31890== by 0x40A88A: main (btrfs.c:246) ==31890== While iterating over backrefs in repair_inode_backrefs, there are several situations to repair one backref according backref->found_dir_item and backref->found_dir_index. Two of these branches may free the backref, but next checks will still access the freed memory. Because these branches are independent, let repair_inode_backrefs skip to handle next backref after free can fix it. Signed-off-by: Su Yue <suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: make max_size consistent with nrChristophe de Dinechin2017-05-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Since we memset tmpl, max_size==0. This does not seem consistent with nr = 1. In check_extent_refs, we will call: set_extent_dirty(root->fs_info->excluded_extents, rec->start, rec->start + rec->max_size - 1); This ends up with BUG_ON(end < start) in insert_state. Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: prevent attempt to insert extent record with max_size==0Christophe de Dinechin2017-05-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When this happens, we will trip a BUG_ON(end < start) in insert_state because in check_extent_refs, we use this max_size expecting it's not zero: set_extent_dirty(root->fs_info->excluded_extents, rec->start, rec->start + rec->max_size - 1); See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435567 for an example where this scenario occurs. Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: disambiguate between cases where add_tree_backref failsChristophe de Dinechin2017-05-02
| | | | | | | | | See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435567 for an example where the message occurs. Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> [ un-indent strings overfowing 80 cols ] Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: tests: Fix fuzz-test for bko-161821.raw.txtLu Fengqi2017-05-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Fuzzed image bko-161821.raw causes btrfs check to get segmentation fault. The function check_owner_ref attempts to access a non-exist quota tree when dealing with extent_item [4198400 4096] in the corrupted filesystem. The function btrfs_new_fs_info always allocates memory for fs_info->quota_root regardless of whether quota_tree exists or not. Additionally, the function btrfs_read_fs_root will directly return fs_info->quota_root if location->objectid == BTRFS_QUOTA_TREE_OBJECTID. This patch does the following things: 1. Do extra check and return ENOENT if quota tree does not exist in the function btrfs_read_fs_root. 2. Free useless fs_info->quota_root in the function btrfs_setup_all_roots to reduce confusion. 3. free_extent_buffer even if check_child_node failed in the function walk_down_tree. Signed-off-by: Lu Fengqi <lufq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Fix memory leak in check_chunks_and_extentsQu Wenruo2017-05-02
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | fsck/003-shift-offsets makes valgrinds complaining about memory leaks. ==5910== ==5910== HEAP SUMMARY: ==5910== in use at exit: 1,112 bytes in 11 blocks ==5910== total heap usage: 161 allocs, 150 frees, 164,800 bytes allocated ==5910== ==5910== 216 (72 direct, 144 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 3 of 5 ==5910== at 0x4C2AF1F: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==5910== by 0x4815A3: add_root_item_to_list (cmds-check.c:9683) ==5910== by 0x481CE2: check_chunks_and_extents (cmds-check.c:9886) ==5910== by 0x48888B: cmd_check (cmds-check.c:12977) ==5910== by 0x40A8C5: main (btrfs.c:246) ==5910== The check_chunks_and_extents() memory leaks are caused by not freeing added root items of normal_trees and dropping_trees. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: lowmem, fix false alert about backref lost for ↵Qu Wenruo2017-03-31
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | SHARED_DATA_REF In check_extent_data_item(), after checking extent item of one data extent, we search inlined data backref, then EXTENT_DATA_REF_KEY. But we didn't search SHARED_DATA_REF, so if the backref is SHARED_DATA_REF, then we will raise a false alert about backref lost. Fix by also checking SHARED_DATA_REF_KEY in check_extent_data_item(). Reported-by: Chris Murphy <chris@colorremedies.com> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: enhance return values of walk_down_tree_v2Su Yue2017-03-08
| | | | | | | | | | | | | In lowmem mode, 'walk_down_tree_v2' returns negative values wheather the error is fatal or not. It causes the loop where 'walk_down_tree_v2' is to break even the error is tolerated and then subsequent nodes process will be skipped. Fix it by redefining meanings of values 'walk_down_tree_v2' returns. Do a similar fix for 'process_one_leaf_v2'. Signed-off-by: Su Yue <suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: lowmem: Fix silent error if first inode item missingQu Wenruo2017-03-08
| | | | | | | | | | If first inode item is missing, lowmem check will detect it but does not output any error message. Add error message for it. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: lowmem: Fix false alert on inline compressed extentQu Wenruo2017-03-08
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Old lowmem check doesn't check if the inline extent is compressed and always checks extent numbytes against inline item size. And when it finds the extent numbytes mismatch with inline item size it doesn't output any error message, just return error silently, making it quite hard to debug. Fix it by only checking extent numbytes against inline item size when the extent is not compressed, and output error message. Reported-by: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: lowmem: Fix extent item size false alertQu Wenruo2017-03-08
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If one extent item has no inline ref, btrfs lowmem mode check can give false alert without outputting any error message. The problem is lowmem mode always assumes that extent item has inline refs, and when it encounters such case it flags the extent item has wrong size, but doesn't output the error message. Although we already have such image submitted, at the commit time due to another bug in cmds-check return value, it doesn't detect it until that bug is fixed. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: lowmem: Fix false alert in checking data extent csumsQu Wenruo2017-03-08
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Btrfs lowmem check can report false csum error like: ERROR: root 5 EXTENT_DATA[257 0] datasum missing ERROR: root 5 EXTENT_DATA[257 4096] prealloc shouldn't have datasum This is because lowmem check code always compare the found csum size with the whole extent which data extents points to. Normally it's OK, but when prealloc extent is written, or reflink is done, data extent can points to part of a larger extent, making the csum check wrong. To fix it, the csum check part is modified to handle plain and compressed extents in different ways: 1) Plain extent Only search csums for the range it refers to. So the search range is from (disk_bytenr + extent_offset) and search length is (extent_num_bytes) 2) Compressed extent Search the whole extent. Search range is from (disk_bytner) and search length is (disk_num_bytes) Reported-by: Chris Murphy <chris@colorremedies.com> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Output verbose error when fsck found a bug in any treeQu Wenruo2017-03-08
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Although we output error like "errors found in extent allocation tree or chunk allocation", but we lacks such output for other trees, but leaving the final "found error is %d" to catch the last return value(and sometime it's cleared) This patch adds extra error message for top level error path, and modify the last "found error is %d" to "error(s) found" or "no error found". Cc: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: lowmem: Fix several bugs related to afterward searchQu Wenruo2017-03-08
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Since btrfs_search_slot() can point to the slot which is beyond the leaves' capacity, we should pay extra attention when doing afterward search. While for lowmem check, several places uses afterward search: 1) Block group item used space check 2) Device item used space check 3) Data extent backref check. In the following case for block group item check, btrfs lowmem mode check will skip the block group and report false alert: leaf 29405184 items 37 free space 1273 generation 11 owner 2 ... item 36 key (77594624 EXTENT_ITEM 2097152) extent refs 1 gen 8 flags DATA extent data backref root 5 objectid 265 offset 0 count 1 leaf 29409280 items 43 free space 670 generation 11 owner 2 item 0 key (96468992 EXTENT_ITEM 2097152) extent refs 1 gen 8 flags DATA extent data backref root 5 objectid 274 offset 0 count 1 item 1 key (96468992 BLOCK_GROUP_ITEM 33554432) block group used 2265088 chunk_objectid 256 flags DATA When checking block group item, we will search key (96468992 0 0) to start from the first item in the block group. While search_slot() will point to leaf 29405184, slot 37 which is beyond leaf capacity. And when reading key from slot 37, uninitialized data can be read out and cause us to exit block group item check, leading to false alert. Fix it by checking path.slot[0] before reading out the key. Reported-by: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net> Reported-by: Chris Murphy <chris@colorremedies.com> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from maybe_repair_root_itemDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from process_duplicatesDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from calc_extent_flagDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from fix_item_offsetDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from delete_bogus_itemDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from fix_key_orderDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from free_extent_record_cacheDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from create_inode_itemDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused arguments from delete_dir_indexDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from check_child_nodeDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: remove unused argument from process_dir_itemDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: remove unused argument from clear_extent_dirtyDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: remove unused argument from set_extent_dirtyDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: remove unused argument from btrfs_csum_dataDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: move ulist.[ch] to kernel-sharedDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | | | | The implementation of ulist_* is same for kernel and userspace, without dependencies, so we can keep it separately for code sync. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: Remove unused function arg in delete_extent_recordsGoldwyn Rodrigues2017-03-08
| | | | | | | new_len is not used in delete_extent_records(). Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: drop unused argument from btrfs_del_ptrDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: move help defines to own headerDavid Sterba2017-03-08
| | | | Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: fix false alert on dropped leaf in lowmem modeQu Wenruo2017-01-25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | For btrfs-progs test case 021-partially-dropped-snapshot-case, if the first leaf is already dropped, btrfs check low-memory mode will report false alert: checking fs roots checksum verify failed on 29917184 found E4E3BDB6 wanted 00000000 checksum verify failed on 29917184 found E4E3BDB6 wanted 00000000 checksum verify failed on 29917184 found E4E3BDB6 wanted 00000000 checksum verify failed on 29917184 found E4E3BDB6 wanted 00000000 This is caused by we are calling check_fs_first_inode() function, unlike the rest part of check_fs_root_v2(), it doesn't have enough check on dropping progress, and caused the false alert. Fix it by checking dropping progress before searching slot. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: get the highest inode for lost+foundGoldwyn Rodrigues2017-01-25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | root->highest_inode is not accurate at the time of creating a lost+found and it fails because the highest_inode+1 is already present. This could be because of fixes after highest_inode is set. Instead, search for the highest inode in the tree and use it for lost+found. This makes root->highest_inode unnecessary and hence deleted. Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Fix false alert on generation mismatch for tree reloc treeQu Wenruo2016-12-14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | For fs with tree reloc tree(under balancing), lowmem mode will report false alert like: ERROR: extent[62914560 4096] backref generation mismatch, wanted: <=9, have: 13 This is because lowmem mode adds a more restrict check, to ensure generation in fs tree won't be smaller than extent tree. In fact such assumption is not right for tree reloc tree, so remove such check. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
* btrfs-progs: check: Fix lowmem false alert on tree reloc treeQu Wenruo2016-12-14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Lowmem mode will report false alert if the fs has tree reloc tree like: ERROR: shared extent[30011392 4096] lost its parent (parent: 30011392, level: 1) The problem is check_shared_block_backref() can't handle tree reloc tree's self-pointing backref. And still try to read out the tree block then seeking for the referencer. The correct method for it is to check if it's tree reloc root. In that case, we should check found the ROOT_ITEM of tree reloc tree in root tree. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.25.1) at 2024-04-25 09:16:22 +0000