| Message ID | 20170118183935.32503-1-fabf@skynet.be (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed 18-01-17 19:39:35, Fabian Frederick wrote: > udf_fill_super() used udf_parse_options() to flag UDF_FLAG_BLOCKSIZE_SET > when blocksize was specified otherwise used 512 bytes > (bdev_logical_block_size) and 2048 bytes (UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE) > IOW both 1024 and 4096 specifications were required or resulted in > > "mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/loop1" > > This patch loops through different block values but also updates > udf_load_vrs() to return -EINVAL instead of 0 when udf_check_vsd() > fails (and uopt->novrs = 0). > The later being the reason for the RFC; we have that case when mounting > a 4kb blocksize against other values but maybe VRS is not mandatory > there ? > > Tested with 512, 1024, 2048 and 4096 blocksize > > Reported-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> > Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <fabf@skynet.be> Thanks for the patch. It looks good to me. I'll test it a bit and pick it up. Honza > --- > fs/udf/super.c | 22 +++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/udf/super.c b/fs/udf/super.c > index 967ad87..078a144 100644 > --- a/fs/udf/super.c > +++ b/fs/udf/super.c > @@ -1957,7 +1957,7 @@ static int udf_load_vrs(struct super_block *sb, struct udf_options *uopt, > if (!nsr_off) { > if (!silent) > udf_warn(sb, "No VRS found\n"); > - return 0; > + return -EINVAL; > } > if (nsr_off == -1) > udf_debug("Failed to read sector at offset %d. " > @@ -2161,15 +2161,19 @@ static int udf_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *options, int silent) > ret = udf_load_vrs(sb, &uopt, silent, &fileset); > } else { > uopt.blocksize = bdev_logical_block_size(sb->s_bdev); > - ret = udf_load_vrs(sb, &uopt, silent, &fileset); > - if (ret == -EAGAIN && uopt.blocksize != UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE) { > - if (!silent) > - pr_notice("Rescanning with blocksize %d\n", > - UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE); > - brelse(sbi->s_lvid_bh); > - sbi->s_lvid_bh = NULL; > - uopt.blocksize = UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE; > + while (uopt.blocksize <= 4096) { > ret = udf_load_vrs(sb, &uopt, silent, &fileset); > + if (ret < 0) { > + if (!silent) { > + pr_notice("Scanning with blocksize %d failed\n", > + uopt.blocksize); > + } > + brelse(sbi->s_lvid_bh); > + sbi->s_lvid_bh = NULL; > + } else > + break; > + > + uopt.blocksize <<= 1; > } > } > if (ret < 0) { > -- > 2.9.3 >
diff --git a/fs/udf/super.c b/fs/udf/super.c index 967ad87..078a144 100644 --- a/fs/udf/super.c +++ b/fs/udf/super.c @@ -1957,7 +1957,7 @@ static int udf_load_vrs(struct super_block *sb, struct udf_options *uopt, if (!nsr_off) { if (!silent) udf_warn(sb, "No VRS found\n"); - return 0; + return -EINVAL; } if (nsr_off == -1) udf_debug("Failed to read sector at offset %d. " @@ -2161,15 +2161,19 @@ static int udf_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *options, int silent) ret = udf_load_vrs(sb, &uopt, silent, &fileset); } else { uopt.blocksize = bdev_logical_block_size(sb->s_bdev); - ret = udf_load_vrs(sb, &uopt, silent, &fileset); - if (ret == -EAGAIN && uopt.blocksize != UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE) { - if (!silent) - pr_notice("Rescanning with blocksize %d\n", - UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE); - brelse(sbi->s_lvid_bh); - sbi->s_lvid_bh = NULL; - uopt.blocksize = UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE; + while (uopt.blocksize <= 4096) { ret = udf_load_vrs(sb, &uopt, silent, &fileset); + if (ret < 0) { + if (!silent) { + pr_notice("Scanning with blocksize %d failed\n", + uopt.blocksize); + } + brelse(sbi->s_lvid_bh); + sbi->s_lvid_bh = NULL; + } else + break; + + uopt.blocksize <<= 1; } } if (ret < 0) {
udf_fill_super() used udf_parse_options() to flag UDF_FLAG_BLOCKSIZE_SET when blocksize was specified otherwise used 512 bytes (bdev_logical_block_size) and 2048 bytes (UDF_DEFAULT_BLOCKSIZE) IOW both 1024 and 4096 specifications were required or resulted in "mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/loop1" This patch loops through different block values but also updates udf_load_vrs() to return -EINVAL instead of 0 when udf_check_vsd() fails (and uopt->novrs = 0). The later being the reason for the RFC; we have that case when mounting a 4kb blocksize against other values but maybe VRS is not mandatory there ? Tested with 512, 1024, 2048 and 4096 blocksize Reported-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <fabf@skynet.be> --- fs/udf/super.c | 22 +++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)