Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the btrfs tree

[Nathan Chancellor]

Hi Stephen (and other maintainers),

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 09:20:01AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs-brauner tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/btrfs/super.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   2f2cfead5107 ("btrfs: remove old mount API code")
> 
> from the btrfs tree and commit:
> 
>   ead622674df5 ("btrfs: Do not restrict writes to btrfs devices")
> 
> from the vfs-brauner tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (the former removed the funtion updated by the latter, but
> a further fix may be required to implement the intent of the latter?)

Yes, the lack of ead622674df5 appears to cause issues with mounting
btrfs volumes on at least next-20231128 due to the presence of commit
6f861765464f ("fs: Block writes to mounted block devices"). In QEMU, I
can see:

  :: running early hook [udev]
  Warning: /lib/modules/6.7.0-rc3-next-20231128/modules.devname not found - ignoring
  Starting systemd-udevd version 252.5-1-arch
  :: running hook [udev]
  :: Triggering uevents...
  :: running hook [keymap]
  :: Loading keymap...kbd_mode: KDSKBMODE: Inappropriate ioctl for device
  done.
  :: performing fsck on '/dev/vda2'
  :: mounting '/dev/vda2' on real root
  mount: /new_root: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/vda2, missing codepage or helper program, or other error.
         dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount system call.
  You are now being dropped into an emergency shell.
  sh: can't access tty; job control turned off
  [rootfs ]#

The following diff allows my VM to boot properly but I am not sure if
there is a better or more proper fix (I am already out of my element
heh). If a proper merge solution cannot be found quickly, can
6f861765464f be reverted in the meantime so that all my machines with
btrfs can boot properly? :)

Cheers,
Nathan

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c
index 99d10a25a579..23db0306b8ef 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/super.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c
@@ -299,6 +299,7 @@ static int btrfs_parse_param(struct fs_context *fc,
 	case Opt_device: {
 		struct btrfs_device *device;
 		blk_mode_t mode = sb_open_mode(fc->sb_flags);
+		mode &= ~BLK_OPEN_RESTRICT_WRITES;
 
 		mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex);
 		device = btrfs_scan_one_device(param->string, mode, false);
@@ -1801,6 +1802,8 @@ static int btrfs_get_tree_super(struct fs_context *fc)
 	blk_mode_t mode = sb_open_mode(fc->sb_flags);
 	int ret;
 
+	mode &= ~BLK_OPEN_RESTRICT_WRITES;
+
 	btrfs_ctx_to_info(fs_info, ctx);
 	mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex);