2019-07-08 08:49:58

by Chao Yu

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: improve print log in f2fs_sanity_check_ckpt()

As Park Ju Hyung suggested:

"I'd like to suggest to write down an actual version of f2fs-tools
here as we've seen older versions of fsck doing even more damage
and the users might not have the latest f2fs-tools installed."

This patch give a more detailed info of how we fix such corruption
to user to avoid damageable repair with low version fsck.

Signed-off-by: Park Ju Hyung <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
---
fs/f2fs/super.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
index 019422a0844c..3cd6c8d810f9 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
@@ -2737,7 +2737,8 @@ int f2fs_sanity_check_ckpt(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)

if (__is_set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_LARGE_NAT_BITMAP_FLAG) &&
le32_to_cpu(ckpt->checksum_offset) != CP_MIN_CHKSUM_OFFSET) {
- f2fs_warn(sbi, "layout of large_nat_bitmap is deprecated, run fsck to repair, chksum_offset: %u",
+ f2fs_warn(sbi, "using deprecated layout of large_nat_bitmap, "
+ "please run fsck v1.13.0 or higher to repair, chksum_offset: %u",
le32_to_cpu(ckpt->checksum_offset));
return 1;
}
--
2.18.0.rc1


2019-07-08 23:50:57

by Jaegeuk Kim

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: improve print log in f2fs_sanity_check_ckpt()

On 07/08, Chao Yu wrote:
> As Park Ju Hyung suggested:
>
> "I'd like to suggest to write down an actual version of f2fs-tools
> here as we've seen older versions of fsck doing even more damage
> and the users might not have the latest f2fs-tools installed."
>
> This patch give a more detailed info of how we fix such corruption
> to user to avoid damageable repair with low version fsck.
>
> Signed-off-by: Park Ju Hyung <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/super.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> index 019422a0844c..3cd6c8d810f9 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> @@ -2737,7 +2737,8 @@ int f2fs_sanity_check_ckpt(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>
> if (__is_set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_LARGE_NAT_BITMAP_FLAG) &&
> le32_to_cpu(ckpt->checksum_offset) != CP_MIN_CHKSUM_OFFSET) {
> - f2fs_warn(sbi, "layout of large_nat_bitmap is deprecated, run fsck to repair, chksum_offset: %u",
> + f2fs_warn(sbi, "using deprecated layout of large_nat_bitmap, "
> + "please run fsck v1.13.0 or higher to repair, chksum_offset: %u",

How about adding the patch name as well?

> le32_to_cpu(ckpt->checksum_offset));
> return 1;
> }
> --
> 2.18.0.rc1

2019-07-09 05:11:59

by Chao Yu

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: improve print log in f2fs_sanity_check_ckpt()

On 2019-7-9 7:47, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 07/08, Chao Yu wrote:
>> As Park Ju Hyung suggested:
>>
>> "I'd like to suggest to write down an actual version of f2fs-tools
>> here as we've seen older versions of fsck doing even more damage
>> and the users might not have the latest f2fs-tools installed."
>>
>> This patch give a more detailed info of how we fix such corruption
>> to user to avoid damageable repair with low version fsck.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Park Ju Hyung <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> fs/f2fs/super.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>> index 019422a0844c..3cd6c8d810f9 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>> @@ -2737,7 +2737,8 @@ int f2fs_sanity_check_ckpt(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>>
>> if (__is_set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_LARGE_NAT_BITMAP_FLAG) &&
>> le32_to_cpu(ckpt->checksum_offset) != CP_MIN_CHKSUM_OFFSET) {
>> - f2fs_warn(sbi, "layout of large_nat_bitmap is deprecated, run fsck to repair, chksum_offset: %u",
>> + f2fs_warn(sbi, "using deprecated layout of large_nat_bitmap, "
>> + "please run fsck v1.13.0 or higher to repair, chksum_offset: %u",
>
> How about adding the patch name as well?

For end-user, I think they don't care about commit id or patch title...

But anyway, let me send v2 as you suggested, either one is okay to me.

Thanks,

>
>> le32_to_cpu(ckpt->checksum_offset));
>> return 1;
>> }
>> --
>> 2.18.0.rc1