On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:58:42PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 05:57:56PM -0700, Liu Bo wrote: > > This BUG() has been triggered by a fuzz testing image, but in fact > > btrfs can handle this gracefully by returning -EIO. > > > > Thus, use btrfs_warn to give us more debugging information than a > > single BUG() and return error properly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <[email protected]> > > --- > > v2: - use btrfs_warn with more debugging information instead of WARN_ONCE. > > - change the patch title. > > > > fs/btrfs/raid56.c | 5 ++++- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c > > index f8b6d41..5f4712c 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c > > @@ -2139,7 +2139,10 @@ int raid56_parity_recover(struct btrfs_root *root, > > struct bio *bio, > > > > rbio->faila = find_logical_bio_stripe(rbio, bio); > > if (rbio->faila == -1) { > > - BUG(); > > + btrfs_warn(root->fs_info, > > + "rbio->faila is -1: (bio has logical %llu len %llu, bbio has map_type > > %llu)", > > That's rather cryptic message for a casual user, can it be prepended by > a short summary what actually happened? Like "bad stripe for parity" or > whatever seems more appropriate to you. Also the changelog could > describe the error condition.
Good point, I'll update it. Thanks, -liubo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
