From: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
After releasing cblocks, the compressed file can be accidentally
disabled in compression mode, since it has zero cblocks. As we are
using IMMUTABLE flag to present released cblocks state, we can add
IMMUTABLE state check when considering the compressed file disabling.
Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
---
fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
index 02811ce15059..14d30740ba03 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
+++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
@@ -3936,6 +3936,8 @@ static inline u64 f2fs_disable_compressed_file(struct inode *inode)
if (!f2fs_compressed_file(inode))
return 0;
if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
+ if (IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
+ return 1;
if (get_dirty_pages(inode))
return 1;
if (fi->i_compr_blocks)
--
2.28.0.402.g5ffc5be6b7-goog
On 2020-8-28 13:46, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> From: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
>
> After releasing cblocks, the compressed file can be accidentally
> disabled in compression mode, since it has zero cblocks. As we are
> using IMMUTABLE flag to present released cblocks state, we can add
> IMMUTABLE state check when considering the compressed file disabling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 02811ce15059..14d30740ba03 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -3936,6 +3936,8 @@ static inline u64 f2fs_disable_compressed_file(struct inode *inode)
> if (!f2fs_compressed_file(inode))
> return 0;
> if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
> + if (IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
> + return 1;
It looks most of callers are from ioctl, should we add immutable check in f2fs
ioctl interfaces if necessary? or I missed existed check.
Thanks,
> if (get_dirty_pages(inode))
> return 1;
> if (fi->i_compr_blocks)
>
Do you have any reason not to put this check here?
If we do this check outside of here, we definitely make a mistake
sooner or later.
2020년 8월 30일 (일) 오후 12:24, Chao Yu <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>
> On 2020-8-28 13:46, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> > From: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
> >
> > After releasing cblocks, the compressed file can be accidentally
> > disabled in compression mode, since it has zero cblocks. As we are
> > using IMMUTABLE flag to present released cblocks state, we can add
> > IMMUTABLE state check when considering the compressed file disabling.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > index 02811ce15059..14d30740ba03 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > @@ -3936,6 +3936,8 @@ static inline u64 f2fs_disable_compressed_file(struct inode *inode)
> > if (!f2fs_compressed_file(inode))
> > return 0;
> > if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
> > + if (IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
> > + return 1;
>
> It looks most of callers are from ioctl, should we add immutable check in f2fs
> ioctl interfaces if necessary? or I missed existed check.
>
> Thanks,
>
> > if (get_dirty_pages(inode))
> > return 1;
> > if (fi->i_compr_blocks)
> >
On 2020/8/31 7:42, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> Do you have any reason not to put this check here?
No, the place is okay to me. :)
> If we do this check outside of here, we definitely make a mistake
> sooner or later.
I just want to see whether we can cover all cases in where we missed to
add immutable check condition if necessary.
Thanks,
>
> 2020년 8월 30일 (일) 오후 12:24, Chao Yu <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>>
>> On 2020-8-28 13:46, Daeho Jeong wrote:
>>> From: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> After releasing cblocks, the compressed file can be accidentally
>>> disabled in compression mode, since it has zero cblocks. As we are
>>> using IMMUTABLE flag to present released cblocks state, we can add
>>> IMMUTABLE state check when considering the compressed file disabling.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>> index 02811ce15059..14d30740ba03 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>> @@ -3936,6 +3936,8 @@ static inline u64 f2fs_disable_compressed_file(struct inode *inode)
>>> if (!f2fs_compressed_file(inode))
>>> return 0;
>>> if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
>>> + if (IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
>>> + return 1;
>>
>> It looks most of callers are from ioctl, should we add immutable check in f2fs
>> ioctl interfaces if necessary? or I missed existed check.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>> if (get_dirty_pages(inode))
>>> return 1;
>>> if (fi->i_compr_blocks)
>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
>
Sorry, I didn't get your point.
So, do you think this patch is ok? And we need to consider that we
need more immutable checks for other cases?
Or you want to remove this immutable check from here and add the check
to each ioctl functions?
2020년 8월 31일 (월) 오전 10:24, Chao Yu <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>
> On 2020/8/31 7:42, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> > Do you have any reason not to put this check here?
>
> No, the place is okay to me. :)
>
> > If we do this check outside of here, we definitely make a mistake
> > sooner or later.
>
> I just want to see whether we can cover all cases in where we missed to
> add immutable check condition if necessary.
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > 2020년 8월 30일 (일) 오후 12:24, Chao Yu <[email protected]>님이 작성:
> >>
> >> On 2020-8-28 13:46, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> >>> From: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> After releasing cblocks, the compressed file can be accidentally
> >>> disabled in compression mode, since it has zero cblocks. As we are
> >>> using IMMUTABLE flag to present released cblocks state, we can add
> >>> IMMUTABLE state check when considering the compressed file disabling.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
> >>> ---
> >>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 2 ++
> >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >>> index 02811ce15059..14d30740ba03 100644
> >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> >>> @@ -3936,6 +3936,8 @@ static inline u64 f2fs_disable_compressed_file(struct inode *inode)
> >>> if (!f2fs_compressed_file(inode))
> >>> return 0;
> >>> if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
> >>> + if (IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
> >>> + return 1;
> >>
> >> It looks most of callers are from ioctl, should we add immutable check in f2fs
> >> ioctl interfaces if necessary? or I missed existed check.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>> if (get_dirty_pages(inode))
> >>> return 1;
> >>> if (fi->i_compr_blocks)
> >>>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
> >
On 2020/8/31 9:44, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> Sorry, I didn't get your point.
>
> So, do you think this patch is ok? And we need to consider that we
> need more immutable checks for other cases?
Yes, this patch looks good to me.
But, IMO, we should discuss about whether we need to add more immutable checks
for other ioctl cases.
- open(O_RDWR)
- ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, F2FS_COMPR_FL)
- write()
- ioctl(RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS) -- inode is immutable now
- ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL) -- Should we allow to update immutable inode?
as we know, normally, immutable inode should deny open(O_WRONLY or O_RDWR) and later update.
Thanks,
> Or you want to remove this immutable check from here and add the check
> to each ioctl functions? >
> 2020년 8월 31일 (월) 오전 10:24, Chao Yu <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>>
>> On 2020/8/31 7:42, Daeho Jeong wrote:
>>> Do you have any reason not to put this check here?
>>
>> No, the place is okay to me. :)
>>
>>> If we do this check outside of here, we definitely make a mistake
>>> sooner or later.
>>
>> I just want to see whether we can cover all cases in where we missed to
>> add immutable check condition if necessary.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>
>>> 2020년 8월 30일 (일) 오후 12:24, Chao Yu <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>>>>
>>>> On 2020-8-28 13:46, Daeho Jeong wrote:
>>>>> From: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> After releasing cblocks, the compressed file can be accidentally
>>>>> disabled in compression mode, since it has zero cblocks. As we are
>>>>> using IMMUTABLE flag to present released cblocks state, we can add
>>>>> IMMUTABLE state check when considering the compressed file disabling.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 2 ++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> index 02811ce15059..14d30740ba03 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> @@ -3936,6 +3936,8 @@ static inline u64 f2fs_disable_compressed_file(struct inode *inode)
>>>>> if (!f2fs_compressed_file(inode))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
>>>>> + if (IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
>>>>> + return 1;
>>>>
>>>> It looks most of callers are from ioctl, should we add immutable check in f2fs
>>>> ioctl interfaces if necessary? or I missed existed check.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>> if (get_dirty_pages(inode))
>>>>> return 1;
>>>>> if (fi->i_compr_blocks)
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
>>>
> .
>
> - open(O_RDWR)
> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> - write()
> - ioctl(RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS) -- inode is immutable now
> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL) -- Should we allow to update immutable inode?
> as we know, normally, immutable inode should deny open(O_WRONLY or O_RDWR) and later update.
>
For this case, with this patch we'll return -EINVAL for
ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL).
I thought RESERVE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS ioctl is always required to get the
file to normal mode after RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS is called.
On 2020/8/31 11:55, Daeho Jeong wrote:
>> - open(O_RDWR)
>> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, F2FS_COMPR_FL)
>> - write()
>> - ioctl(RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS) -- inode is immutable now
>> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL) -- Should we allow to update immutable inode?
>> as we know, normally, immutable inode should deny open(O_WRONLY or O_RDWR) and later update.
>>
>
> For this case, with this patch we'll return -EINVAL for
> ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL).
> I thought RESERVE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS ioctl is always required to get the
> file to normal mode after RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS is called.
That's an example, after compressed block release, shouldn't we disallow other ioctl
interface which updates immutable inode?
> .
>
I think this patch is enough for now.
If you have anything else we should take care, please let me know~
2020년 8월 31일 (월) 오후 3:08, Chao Yu <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>
> On 2020/8/31 11:55, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> >> - open(O_RDWR)
> >> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> >> - write()
> >> - ioctl(RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS) -- inode is immutable now
> >> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL) -- Should we allow to update immutable inode?
> >> as we know, normally, immutable inode should deny open(O_WRONLY or O_RDWR) and later update.
> >>
> >
> > For this case, with this patch we'll return -EINVAL for
> > ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL).
> > I thought RESERVE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS ioctl is always required to get the
> > file to normal mode after RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS is called.
>
> That's an example, after compressed block release, shouldn't we disallow other ioctl
> interface which updates immutable inode?
>
> > .
> >
On 2020/8/28 13:46, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> From: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
>
> After releasing cblocks, the compressed file can be accidentally
> disabled in compression mode, since it has zero cblocks. As we are
> using IMMUTABLE flag to present released cblocks state, we can add
> IMMUTABLE state check when considering the compressed file disabling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
Thanks,