On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:14:56AM -0700, Tahsin Erdogan wrote:
> ea_inode contents are treated as metadata, that's why it is journaled
> during initial writes. Failing to call revoke during freeing could cause
> user data to be overwritten with original ea_inode contents during journal
> replay.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tahsin Erdogan <tah...@google.com>
> ---
> fs/ext4/extents.c | 3 ++-
> fs/ext4/indirect.c | 3 ++-
> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> index 3e36508610b7..e0a8425ff74d 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
> @@ -2488,7 +2488,8 @@ int ext4_ext_index_trans_blocks(struct inode *inode,
> int extents)
>
> static inline int get_default_free_blocks_flags(struct inode *inode)
> {
> - if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) || S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))
> + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) || S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode) ||
> + ext4_test_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_EA_INODE))
> return EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_METADATA | EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET;
> else if (ext4_should_journal_data(inode))
> return EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET;
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/indirect.c b/fs/ext4/indirect.c
> index bc15c2c17633..7ffa290cbb8e 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/indirect.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/indirect.c
> @@ -829,7 +829,8 @@ static int ext4_clear_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct
> inode *inode,
> int flags = EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_VALIDATED;
> int err;
>
> - if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) || S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))
> + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) || S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode) ||
> + ext4_test_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_EA_INODE))
I appreciate the thoroughness of doing this even for blockmapped
ea_inode files, and I'm not complaining about this hunk at all. :)
However, please consider requiring the extents feature + format as a
prerequisite for ea_inodes. ext4 has traditionally been very ...
permissive about supporting a diverse range of feature options, but the
cost of that diversity is that the feature support matrix that the
community has to support is already untestably large.
I think it would be wise not to support !extents && ea_inode,
particularly since blockmaps aren't protected by metadata_csum and so in
the long run it's probably best to minimize the introduction of new
blockmap files (on ext4 anyway).
--D
> flags |= EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET | EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_METADATA;
> else if (ext4_should_journal_data(inode))
> flags |= EXT4_FREE_BLOCKS_FORGET;
> --
> 2.13.0.219.gdb65acc882-goog
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
Jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
