Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-23008-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <70a44ec7-8842-47d3-86d4-67dd173f9d82@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:05:19 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] f2fs: introduce FAULT_BLKADDR_INCONSISTENCE
To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20231228143152.1543509-1-chao@kernel.org>
 <20231228143152.1543509-6-chao@kernel.org> <ZZR4Tup3Lm3zh2V1@google.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZZR4Tup3Lm3zh2V1@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2024/1/3 4:55, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 12/28, Chao Yu wrote:
>> We will encounter below inconsistent status when FAULT_BLKADDR type
>> fault injection is on.
>>
>> Info: checkpoint state = d6 :  nat_bits crc fsck compacted_summary orphan_inodes sudden-power-off
>> [ASSERT] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1254)  --> ino: 0x1c100 has i_blocks: 000000c0, but has 191 blocks
>> [FIX] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1260)  --> [0x1c100] i_blocks=0x000000c0 -> 0xbf
>> [FIX] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1269)  --> [0x1c100] i_compr_blocks=0x00000026 -> 0x27
>> [ASSERT] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1254)  --> ino: 0x1cadb has i_blocks: 0000002f, but has 46 blocks
>> [FIX] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1260)  --> [0x1cadb] i_blocks=0x0000002f -> 0x2e
>> [FIX] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1269)  --> [0x1cadb] i_compr_blocks=0x00000011 -> 0x12
>> [ASSERT] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1254)  --> ino: 0x1c62c has i_blocks: 00000002, but has 1 blocks
>> [FIX] (fsck_chk_inode_blk:1260)  --> [0x1c62c] i_blocks=0x00000002 -> 0x1
>>
>> After we inject fault into f2fs_is_valid_blkaddr() during truncation,
>> a) it missed to increase @nr_free or @valid_blocks
>> b) it can cause in blkaddr leak in truncated dnode
>> Which may cause inconsistent status.
>>
>> This patch separates FAULT_BLKADDR_INCONSISTENCE from FAULT_BLKADDR,
>> so that we can:
>> a) use FAULT_BLKADDR_INCONSISTENCE in f2fs_truncate_data_blocks_range()
>> to simulate inconsistent issue independently,
>> b) FAULT_BLKADDR fault will not cause any inconsistent status, we can
>> just use it to check error path handling in kernel side.
> 
> How about defining FAULT_BLKADDR_VALIDITY and FAULT_BLKADDR_CONSISTENCY?

Better, :)

Thanks,