| Message ID | 1391220015-21946-1-git-send-email-fdmanana@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Filipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> wrote: > This fixes a case that the commit titled: > > Btrfs: fix infinite path build loops in incremental send > > didn't cover. If the parent-child relationship between 2 directories > is inverted, both get renamed, and the former parent has a file that > got renamed too (but remains a child of that directory), the incremental > send operation would use the file's old path after sending an unlink > operation for that old path, causing receive to fail on future operations > like changing owner, permissions or utimes of the corresponding inode. > > This is not a regression from the commit mentioned before, as without > that commit we would fall into the issues that commit fixed, so it's > just one case that wasn't covered before. > > Simple steps to reproduce this issue are: > > $ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdb3 > $ mount /dev/sdb3 /mnt/btrfs > $ mkdir -p /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/d > $ touch /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/d/file > $ mkdir -p /mnt/btrfs/a/b/x > $ btrfs subvol snapshot -r /mnt/btrfs /mnt/btrfs/snap1 > $ mv /mnt/btrfs/a/b/x /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2 > $ mv /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/d /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2/d2 > $ mv /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2/d2/file /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2/d2/file2 > $ btrfs subvol snapshot -r /mnt/btrfs /mnt/btrfs/snap2 > $ btrfs send -p /mnt/btrfs/snap1 /mnt/btrfs/snap2 > /tmp/incremental.send > > A patch to update the test btrfs/030 from xfstests, so that it covers > this case, will be submitted soon. > > Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> Hi, Should this go to 3.14? It is covered by the test case btrfs/030 for xfstests. thanks > --- > fs/btrfs/send.c | 10 +--------- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/send.c b/fs/btrfs/send.c > index 7250d86..e0b49f6 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/send.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/send.c > @@ -2121,8 +2121,6 @@ static int get_cur_path(struct send_ctx *sctx, u64 ino, u64 gen, > u64 parent_inode = 0; > u64 parent_gen = 0; > int stop = 0; > - u64 start_ino = ino; > - u64 start_gen = gen; > int skip_name_cache = 0; > > name = fs_path_alloc(); > @@ -2134,7 +2132,6 @@ static int get_cur_path(struct send_ctx *sctx, u64 ino, u64 gen, > if (is_waiting_for_move(sctx, ino)) > skip_name_cache = 1; > > -again: > dest->reversed = 1; > fs_path_reset(dest); > > @@ -2149,13 +2146,8 @@ again: > stop = 1; > > if (!skip_name_cache && > - is_waiting_for_move(sctx, parent_inode)) { > - ino = start_ino; > - gen = start_gen; > - stop = 0; > + is_waiting_for_move(sctx, parent_inode)) > skip_name_cache = 1; > - goto again; > - } > > ret = fs_path_add_path(dest, name); > if (ret < 0) > -- > 1.7.9.5 >
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/send.c b/fs/btrfs/send.c index 7250d86..e0b49f6 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/send.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/send.c @@ -2121,8 +2121,6 @@ static int get_cur_path(struct send_ctx *sctx, u64 ino, u64 gen, u64 parent_inode = 0; u64 parent_gen = 0; int stop = 0; - u64 start_ino = ino; - u64 start_gen = gen; int skip_name_cache = 0; name = fs_path_alloc(); @@ -2134,7 +2132,6 @@ static int get_cur_path(struct send_ctx *sctx, u64 ino, u64 gen, if (is_waiting_for_move(sctx, ino)) skip_name_cache = 1; -again: dest->reversed = 1; fs_path_reset(dest); @@ -2149,13 +2146,8 @@ again: stop = 1; if (!skip_name_cache && - is_waiting_for_move(sctx, parent_inode)) { - ino = start_ino; - gen = start_gen; - stop = 0; + is_waiting_for_move(sctx, parent_inode)) skip_name_cache = 1; - goto again; - } ret = fs_path_add_path(dest, name); if (ret < 0)
This fixes a case that the commit titled: Btrfs: fix infinite path build loops in incremental send didn't cover. If the parent-child relationship between 2 directories is inverted, both get renamed, and the former parent has a file that got renamed too (but remains a child of that directory), the incremental send operation would use the file's old path after sending an unlink operation for that old path, causing receive to fail on future operations like changing owner, permissions or utimes of the corresponding inode. This is not a regression from the commit mentioned before, as without that commit we would fall into the issues that commit fixed, so it's just one case that wasn't covered before. Simple steps to reproduce this issue are: $ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdb3 $ mount /dev/sdb3 /mnt/btrfs $ mkdir -p /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/d $ touch /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/d/file $ mkdir -p /mnt/btrfs/a/b/x $ btrfs subvol snapshot -r /mnt/btrfs /mnt/btrfs/snap1 $ mv /mnt/btrfs/a/b/x /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2 $ mv /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/d /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2/d2 $ mv /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2/d2/file /mnt/btrfs/a/b/c/x2/d2/file2 $ btrfs subvol snapshot -r /mnt/btrfs /mnt/btrfs/snap2 $ btrfs send -p /mnt/btrfs/snap1 /mnt/btrfs/snap2 > /tmp/incremental.send A patch to update the test btrfs/030 from xfstests, so that it covers this case, will be submitted soon. Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> --- fs/btrfs/send.c | 10 +--------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-)