On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 11:06:37PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> We aren't checking the SB csum when the device scanned,
> instead we do that when mounting the device, and if the
> csum fails we fail the mount. How if we check the csum
> when the device is scanned, I can't see any reason for
> why not? any idea?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.j...@oracle.com>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 9 +++++----
>  fs/btrfs/disk-io.h | 2 ++
>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 4 ++++
>  3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
> index 156116655a32..28e71e2aaa92 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
> @@ -393,8 +393,8 @@ static int verify_parent_transid(struct extent_io_tree 
> *io_tree,
>   * Return 0 if the superblock checksum type matches the checksum value of 
> that
>   * algorithm. Pass the raw disk superblock data.
>   */
> -static int btrfs_check_super_csum(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
> -                               char *raw_disk_sb)
> +int btrfs_check_super_csum(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
> +                        char *raw_disk_sb)
>  {
>       struct btrfs_super_block *disk_sb =
>               (struct btrfs_super_block *)raw_disk_sb;
> @@ -420,8 +420,9 @@ static int btrfs_check_super_csum(struct btrfs_fs_info 
> *fs_info,
>       }
>  
>       if (csum_type >= ARRAY_SIZE(btrfs_csum_sizes)) {
> -             btrfs_err(fs_info, "unsupported checksum algorithm %u",
> -                             csum_type);
> +             if (fs_info)
> +                     btrfs_err(fs_info, "unsupported checksum algorithm %u",
> +                               csum_type);
>               ret = 1;
>       }
>  
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
> index 70a88d61b547..683e4b0c4e24 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
> @@ -70,6 +70,8 @@ struct buffer_head *btrfs_read_dev_super(struct 
> block_device *bdev);
>  int btrfs_read_dev_one_super(struct block_device *bdev, int copy_num,
>                       struct buffer_head **bh_ret);
>  int btrfs_commit_super(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info);
> +int btrfs_check_super_csum(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
> +                        char *raw_disk_sb);
>  struct btrfs_root *btrfs_read_fs_root(struct btrfs_root *tree_root,
>                                     struct btrfs_key *location);
>  int btrfs_init_fs_root(struct btrfs_root *root);
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> index 1e72357bdfa8..af34b8a611a0 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> @@ -677,6 +677,10 @@ static int btrfs_open_one_device(struct btrfs_fs_devices 
> *fs_devices,
>       if (ret)
>               return ret;
>  
> +     if (btrfs_check_super_csum(NULL, bh->b_data)) {

I think the error reports during scan should be minimized, in this case
each time the scan will be run on that device, the checksum mismatch
will be reported.

I don't really like to see the NULL passed to btrfs_check_super_csum but
it's still better than adding an extra parameter to set the verbosity.
Documenting that at btrfs_check_super_csum would be good, mentioning
that the function can be called from mount or scan.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to