Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 24 May 2022 01:38:44 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
To:     Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
Cc:     linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
        adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jack@suse.cz,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
        yebin10@huawei.com, yukuai3@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: correct the judgment of BUG in
 ext4_mb_normalize_request
Message-ID: <20220523200844.fal3pmp7epid3rvv@riteshh-domain>
References: <20220521134217.312071-1-libaokun1@huawei.com>
 <20220521134217.312071-3-libaokun1@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220521134217.312071-3-libaokun1@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 22/05/21 09:42PM, Baokun Li wrote:
> When either of the "start + size <= ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical" or
> "start > ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical" conditions is met, it indicates
> that the fe_logical is not in the allocated range.

Sounds about right to me based on the logic in ext4_mb_use_inode_pa().
We try to allocate/preallocate such that ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical should fall
within the preallocated range. So if our start or start + size doesn't include
fe_logical then it is a bug in the ext4_mb_normalize_request() logic.

But should we be so harsh to hit a bug_on() or make it warn_on()?

Also did you run any fs tests with this change. Since it looks like this
logic existed since mballoc was introduced.


> In this case, it should be bug_ON.
>
> Fixes: dfe076c106f6 ("ext4: get rid of code duplication")

No, there is no issue with this patch. It correctly just removes the duplicate
logic.

> Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
> ---
>  fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 32410b79b664..d0fb57970648 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -4190,7 +4190,7 @@ ext4_mb_normalize_request(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac,
>  	}
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
>
> -	if (start + size <= ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical &&
> +	if (start + size <= ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical ||
>  			start > ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical) {
>  		ext4_msg(ac->ac_sb, KERN_ERR,
>  			 "start %lu, size %lu, fe_logical %lu",
> --
> 2.31.1
>