Re: [PATCH]btrfs: Fix fstest case btrfs/219
From: hmsjwzb
Date: Fri Jul 22 2022 - 01:34:36 EST
On 7/21/22 09:37, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 21.07.22 г. 11:36 ч., Flint.Wang wrote:
>> Hi,
>> fstest btrfs/291 failed.
>>
>> [How to reproduce]
>> mkdir -p /mnt/test/219.mnt
>> xfs_io -f -c "truncate 256m" /mnt/test/219.img1
>> mkfs.btrfs /mnt/test/219.img1
>> cp /mnt/test/219.img1 /mnt/test/219.img2
>> mount -o loop /mnt/test/219.img1 /mnt/test/219.mnt
>> umount /mnt/test/219.mnt
>> losetup -f --show /mnt/test/219.img1 dev
>> mount /dev/loop0 /mnt/test/219.mnt
>> umount /mnt/test/219.mnt
>> mount -o loop /mnt/test/219.img2 /mnt/test/219.mnt
>>
>> [Root cause]
>> if (fs_devices->opened && found_transid < device->generation) {
>> /*
>> * That is if the FS is _not_ mounted and if you
>> * are here, that means there is more than one
>> * disk with same uuid and devid.We keep the one
>> * with larger generation number or the last-in if
>> * generation are equal.
>> */
>> mutex_unlock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
>> return ERR_PTR(-EEXIST);
>> }
>>
>> [Personal opinion]
>> User might back up a block device to another. I think it is improper
>> to forbid user from mounting it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Flint.Wang <hmsjwzb@xxxxxxxx>
>
>
> This lacks any explanation whatsoever so it's not possible to judge whether the fix is correct or not.
>
>> ---
>> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> index 6aa6bc769569a..76af32032ac85 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> @@ -900,7 +900,7 @@ static noinline struct btrfs_device *device_list_add(const char *path,
>> * tracking a problem where systems fail mount by subvolume id
>> * when we reject replacement on a mounted FS.
>> */
>> - if (!fs_devices->opened && found_transid < device->generation) {
>> + if (fs_devices->opened && found_transid < device->generation) {
>> /*
>> * That is if the FS is _not_ mounted and if you
>> * are here, that means there is more than one
Hi Nikolay,
It seems the failure of btrfs/219 needs some explanation.
Here is the thing.
1. A storage device A with btrfs filesystem is running on a host.
2. For example, we backup the device A to an exactly some device B.
3. The device A continue to run for a while so the device->generation is getting bigger.
4. Then you umount the device A and try to mount device B.
5. Kernel find that device A has the same UUID as device B and has bigger device->generation.
So the mount request of device B will be rejected.
if (!fs_devices->opened && found_transid < device->generation) {
/*
* That is if the FS is _not_ mounted and if you
* are here, that means there is more than one
* disk with same uuid and devid.We keep the one
* with larger generation number or the last-in if
* generation are equal.
*/
mutex_unlock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
return ERR_PTR(-EEXIST);
}
I think it is improper to reject that request. Because device A is not in open state.
Thanks