xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 15/19 v3] mkfs: don't treat files as though they are block de

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/19 v3] mkfs: don't treat files as though they are block devices
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 14:11:38 -0500
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1461941267-31556-1-git-send-email-jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1461311383-30897-1-git-send-email-jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx> <1461941267-31556-1-git-send-email-jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0

On 4/29/16 9:47 AM, Jan Tulak wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> If the device is actually a file, and "-d file" is not specified,
> mkfs will try to treat it as a block device and get stuff wrong.
> Image files don't necessarily have the same sector sizes as the
> block device or filesystem underlying the image file, nor should we
> be issuing discard ioctls on image files.
> 
> To fix this sanely, only require "-d file" if the device name is
> invalid to trigger creation of the file. Otherwise, use stat() to
> determine if the device is a file or block device and deal with that
> appropriately by setting the "isfile" variables and turning off
> direct IO. Then ensure that we check the "isfile" options before
> doing things that are specific to block devices.
> 
> Other file/blockdev issues fixed:
>       - use getstr to detect specifying the data device name
>         twice.
>       - check file/size/name parameters before anything else.
>       - overwrite checks need to be done before the image file is
>         opened and potentially truncated.
>       - blkid_get_topology() should not be called for image files,
>         so warn when it is called that way.
>       - zero_old_xfs_structures() emits a spurious error:
>               "existing superblock read failed: Success"
>         when it is run on a truncated image file. Don't warn if we
>         see this problem on an image file.
>       - Don't issue discards on image files.
>       - Use fsync() for image files, not BLKFLSBUF in
>         platform_flush_device() for Linux.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> ---
> CHANGES:
> * read image file size in advance of O_TRUNC in case of dfile&&dcreat
> Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  libxfs/init.c   |  21 ++++++-
>  libxfs/linux.c  |  11 +++-
>  mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c | 182 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  3 files changed, 154 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/libxfs/init.c b/libxfs/init.c
> index 8d747e8..c7ae00d 100644
> --- a/libxfs/init.c
> +++ b/libxfs/init.c
> @@ -253,8 +253,15 @@ libxfs_init(libxfs_init_t *a)
>       rtname = a->rtname;
>       a->dfd = a->logfd = a->rtfd = -1;
>       a->ddev = a->logdev = a->rtdev = 0;
> -     a->dbsize = a->lbsize = a->rtbsize = 0;
> -     a->dsize = a->logBBsize = a->logBBstart = a->rtsize = 0;
> +     a->lbsize = a->rtbsize = 0;
> +     a->logBBsize = a->logBBstart = a->rtsize = 0;
> +
> +     // We can reset dbsize only when it is not a file, or we won't
> +     // truncate it. Otherwise, we loose the size of the file forever.

please don't use c++ comments in xfsprogs, we use /* comments */

...

>  static void
> +check_device_type(
> +     const char      *name,
> +     int             *isfile,
> +     bool            no_size,
> +     bool            no_name,
> +     int             *create,
> +     bool            force_overwrite,
> +     const char      *optname)
> +{
> +     struct stat64 statbuf;
> +     /*
> +     if (*isfile && (no_size || no_name)) {
> +             fprintf(stderr,
> +     _("if -%s file then -%s name and -%s size are required\n"),
> +                     optname, optname, optname);
> +             usage();
> +     }*/

What is this?

Jan, I'm just going to go back to the original patches posted in your V2 series,
and either give them Reviewed-by's, or send followup fix-up patches with a

Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>: fixed up foo, bar, baz

tag and a Reviewed-by to go with it, I think that might be the fastest path to
finally getting this stuff merged.

Thanks,
-Eric

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>