Re: [PATCH] ext4: cache es->s_journal_inum in ext4_sb_info

[Zhang Yi]

On 2025/3/26 10:16, Baokun Li wrote:
> On 2025/3/26 1:57, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 10:31:29PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 01:42:31PM +0530, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote:
>>>>> So this is something we need to do if the journal is actived, and if
>>>>> it's active, then sbi->s_journal will be non-NULL, and so we can just
>>>>> check to see if inode == sbi->s_journal instead.  This will simplify
>>>> I believe you mean inode == sbi->s_journal->j_inode here right?
>>> Yes, that's what I meant; sorry for the not catching this before I
>>> sent my reply.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>                     - Ted
>> Hi Ted, Baokun,
>>
>> I got some time to revisit this. Seems like checking against
>> s_journal->j_inode is not enough. This is because both
>> ext4_check_blockref() and check_block_validity() can be called even
>> before journal->j_inode is set:
>>
>> ext4_open_inode_journal
>>    ext4_get_journal_inode
>>       __ext4_iget
>>           ext4_ind_check_inode
>>               ext4_check_blockref  /* j_inode not set */
>>
>>    journal = jbd2_journal_init_inode
>>       bmap
>>           ext4_bmap
>>              iomap_bmap
>>                ext4_iomap_begin
>>                    ext4_map_blocks
>>                        check_block_validity
>>
>>    journal->j_inode = inode
>>
>>
>> Now, I think in this case the best solution might be to use the extra
>> field like we do in this patch but set  EXT4_SB(sb)->s_journal_ino
>> sufficiently early.
>>
>> Thoughts?
> 
> Because system zone setup happens after the journal are loaded, I think we
> can skip the check if the journal haven't been loaded yet, like this:
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index d04d8a7f12e7..38dc72ff7e78 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -383,9 +383,10 @@ static int __check_block_validity(struct inode *inode, const char *func,
>                                 unsigned int line,
>                                 struct ext4_map_blocks *map)
>  {
> +       journal_t *journal = EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_journal;
> +
>         if (ext4_has_feature_journal(inode->i_sb) &&
> -           (inode->i_ino ==
> - le32_to_cpu(EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_es->s_journal_inum)))
> +           (!journal || inode == journal->j_inode))
>                 return 0;
>         if (!ext4_inode_block_valid(inode, map->m_pblk, map->m_len)) {
>                 ext4_error_inode(inode, func, line, map->m_pblk,
> 
> If any part of the journal area overlaps with the system zone, we'll catch
> it when we add the journal area to the system zone later.
> 
> 

Since the creation of the system zone relies on the journal being
loaded, I think there is no risk in proceeding to call
ext4_inode_block_valid() to perform a basic block range check for
the journal inode, or even better.

Thanks,
Yi.