commit: e9f10a9f82f0947e4dbab972345827bf6ddcd393 Author: Mike Pagano <mpagano <AT> gentoo <DOT> org> AuthorDate: Thu Nov 10 18:18:04 2022 +0000 Commit: Mike Pagano <mpagano <AT> gentoo <DOT> org> CommitDate: Thu Nov 10 18:18:04 2022 +0000 URL: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/linux-patches.git/commit/?id=e9f10a9f
Remove redundant patch Removed: btrfs: Don't use btrfs_chunk::sub_stripes from disk Signed-off-by: Mike Pagano <mpagano <AT> gentoo.org> 0000_README | 4 -- 1900_btrfs-chunk-sub_stripes-fix.patch | 92 ---------------------------------- 2 files changed, 96 deletions(-) diff --git a/0000_README b/0000_README index 52ac8549..04880a09 100644 --- a/0000_README +++ b/0000_README @@ -87,10 +87,6 @@ Patch: 1700_sparc-address-warray-bound-warnings.patch From: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/109 Desc: Address -Warray-bounds warnings -Patch: 1900_btrfs-chunk-sub_stripes-fix.patch -From: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git -Desc: btrfs: Don't use btrfs_chunk::sub_stripes from disk - Patch: 2000_BT-Check-key-sizes-only-if-Secure-Simple-Pairing-enabled.patch From: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/[email protected]/raw Desc: Bluetooth: Check key sizes only when Secure Simple Pairing is enabled. See bug #686758 diff --git a/1900_btrfs-chunk-sub_stripes-fix.patch b/1900_btrfs-chunk-sub_stripes-fix.patch deleted file mode 100644 index 2ffe02fe..00000000 --- a/1900_btrfs-chunk-sub_stripes-fix.patch +++ /dev/null @@ -1,92 +0,0 @@ -From 76a66ba101329316a5d7f4275070be22eb85fdf2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 -From: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]> -Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:43:45 +0800 -Subject: btrfs: don't use btrfs_chunk::sub_stripes from disk - -[BUG] -There are two reports (the earliest one from LKP, a more recent one from -kernel bugzilla) that we can have some chunks with 0 as sub_stripes. - -This will cause divide-by-zero errors at btrfs_rmap_block, which is -introduced by a recent kernel patch ac0677348f3c ("btrfs: merge -calculations for simple striped profiles in btrfs_rmap_block"): - - if (map->type & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0 | - BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10)) { - stripe_nr = stripe_nr * map->num_stripes + i; - stripe_nr = div_u64(stripe_nr, map->sub_stripes); <<< - } - -[CAUSE] -From the more recent report, it has been proven that we have some chunks -with 0 as sub_stripes, mostly caused by older mkfs. - -It turns out that the mkfs.btrfs fix is only introduced in 6718ab4d33aa -("btrfs-progs: Initialize sub_stripes to 1 in btrfs_alloc_data_chunk") -which is included in v5.4 btrfs-progs release. - -So there would be quite some old filesystems with such 0 sub_stripes. - -[FIX] -Just don't trust the sub_stripes values from disk. - -We have a trusted btrfs_raid_array[] to fetch the correct sub_stripes -numbers for each profile and that are fixed. - -By this, we can keep the compatibility with older filesystems while -still avoid divide-by-zero bugs. - -Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]> -Reported-by: Viktor Kuzmin <[email protected]> -Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216559 -Fixes: ac0677348f3c ("btrfs: merge calculations for simple striped profiles in btrfs_rmap_block") -CC: [email protected] # 6.0 -Reviewed-by: Su Yue <[email protected]> -Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <[email protected]> -Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]> -Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]> ---- - fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 12 +++++++++++- - 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) - -(limited to 'fs/btrfs/volumes.c') - -diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c -index 94ba46d579205..a8d4bc6a19379 100644 ---- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c -+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c -@@ -7142,6 +7142,7 @@ static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_key *key, struct extent_buffer *leaf, - u64 devid; - u64 type; - u8 uuid[BTRFS_UUID_SIZE]; -+ int index; - int num_stripes; - int ret; - int i; -@@ -7149,6 +7150,7 @@ static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_key *key, struct extent_buffer *leaf, - logical = key->offset; - length = btrfs_chunk_length(leaf, chunk); - type = btrfs_chunk_type(leaf, chunk); -+ index = btrfs_bg_flags_to_raid_index(type); - num_stripes = btrfs_chunk_num_stripes(leaf, chunk); - - #if BITS_PER_LONG == 32 -@@ -7202,7 +7204,15 @@ static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_key *key, struct extent_buffer *leaf, - map->io_align = btrfs_chunk_io_align(leaf, chunk); - map->stripe_len = btrfs_chunk_stripe_len(leaf, chunk); - map->type = type; -- map->sub_stripes = btrfs_chunk_sub_stripes(leaf, chunk); -+ /* -+ * We can't use the sub_stripes value, as for profiles other than -+ * RAID10, they may have 0 as sub_stripes for filesystems created by -+ * older mkfs (<v5.4). -+ * In that case, it can cause divide-by-zero errors later. -+ * Since currently sub_stripes is fixed for each profile, let's -+ * use the trusted value instead. -+ */ -+ map->sub_stripes = btrfs_raid_array[index].sub_stripes; - map->verified_stripes = 0; - em->orig_block_len = btrfs_calc_stripe_length(em); - for (i = 0; i < num_stripes; i++) { --- -cgit
