| Message ID | f06e8b9a-d5c8-f91f-8637-0b9f625d9d48@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | mkfs.xfs: fix ASSERT on too-small device with stripe geometry | expand |
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 01:26:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > When a too-small device is created with stripe geometry, we hit an > assert in align_ag_geometry(): > > # truncate --size=10444800 testfile > # mkfs.xfs -dsu=65536,sw=1 testfile > mkfs.xfs: xfs_mkfs.c:2834: align_ag_geometry: Assertion `cfg->agcount != 0' failed. > > This is because align_ag_geometry() finds that the size of the last > (only) AG is too small, and attempts to trim it off. Obviously 0 > AGs is invalid, and we hit the ASSERT. > > Fix this by skipping the last-ag-trim if there is only one AG, and > add a new test to validate_ag_geometry() which offers a very specific, > clear warning if the device (in dblocks) is smaller than the minimum > allowed AG size. > > Reported-by: Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> > --- > > diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > index a687f385..da8c5986 100644 > --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > @@ -1038,6 +1038,15 @@ validate_ag_geometry( > uint64_t agsize, > uint64_t agcount) > { > + /* Is this device simply too small? */ > + if (dblocks < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { > + fprintf(stderr, > + _("device (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), > + (long long)dblocks, > + (long long)XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)); > + usage(); > + } > + > if (agsize < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { > fprintf(stderr, > _("agsize (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), > @@ -2827,11 +2836,12 @@ validate: > * and drop the blocks. > */ > if (cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize != 0 && > + cfg->agcount > 1 && > (cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(cfg->blocklog))) { > +printf("%d %d %d\n", cfg->dblocks, cfg->agsize, cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize); What is this? (The rest of the logic looks fine) --D > ASSERT(!cli_opt_set(&dopts, D_AGCOUNT)); > cfg->dblocks = (xfs_rfsblock_t)((cfg->agcount - 1) * cfg->agsize); > cfg->agcount--; > - ASSERT(cfg->agcount != 0); > } > > validate_ag_geometry(cfg->blocklog, cfg->dblocks, >
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 01:26:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > When a too-small device is created with stripe geometry, we hit an > assert in align_ag_geometry(): > > # truncate --size=10444800 testfile > # mkfs.xfs -dsu=65536,sw=1 testfile > mkfs.xfs: xfs_mkfs.c:2834: align_ag_geometry: Assertion `cfg->agcount != 0' failed. > > This is because align_ag_geometry() finds that the size of the last > (only) AG is too small, and attempts to trim it off. Obviously 0 > AGs is invalid, and we hit the ASSERT. > > Fix this by skipping the last-ag-trim if there is only one AG, and > add a new test to validate_ag_geometry() which offers a very specific, > clear warning if the device (in dblocks) is smaller than the minimum > allowed AG size. > > Reported-by: Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> > --- > > diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > index a687f385..da8c5986 100644 > --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > @@ -1038,6 +1038,15 @@ validate_ag_geometry( > uint64_t agsize, > uint64_t agcount) > { > + /* Is this device simply too small? */ > + if (dblocks < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { > + fprintf(stderr, > + _("device (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), > + (long long)dblocks, > + (long long)XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)); > + usage(); > + } Ummm, shouldn't this be caught two checks later down by this: if (agsize > dblocks) { fprintf(stderr, _("agsize (%lld blocks) too big, data area is %lld blocks\n"), (long long)agsize, (long long)dblocks); usage(); } because the agsize has already been validated to be within XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS() and XFS_AG_MAX_BLOCKS(), so if dblocks is only 10MB then the agsize must be greater than dblocks as the minimum valid AG size is 16MB.... Also, what's with the repeated agsize < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog) and agsize > XFS_AG_MAX_BLOCKS(blocklog) checks in that function? > + > if (agsize < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { > fprintf(stderr, > _("agsize (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), > @@ -2827,11 +2836,12 @@ validate: > * and drop the blocks. > */ > if (cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize != 0 && > + cfg->agcount > 1 && > (cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(cfg->blocklog))) { > +printf("%d %d %d\n", cfg->dblocks, cfg->agsize, cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize); > ASSERT(!cli_opt_set(&dopts, D_AGCOUNT)); > cfg->dblocks = (xfs_rfsblock_t)((cfg->agcount - 1) * cfg->agsize); > cfg->agcount--; > - ASSERT(cfg->agcount != 0); > } We should never get here - this assert and code check is correct and valid - it's pointed us directly to a logic bug in mkfs, so IMO it should not be changed/removed. Cheers, Dave.
On 9/14/20 5:12 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 01:26:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> When a too-small device is created with stripe geometry, we hit an >> assert in align_ag_geometry(): >> >> # truncate --size=10444800 testfile >> # mkfs.xfs -dsu=65536,sw=1 testfile >> mkfs.xfs: xfs_mkfs.c:2834: align_ag_geometry: Assertion `cfg->agcount != 0' failed. >> >> This is because align_ag_geometry() finds that the size of the last >> (only) AG is too small, and attempts to trim it off. Obviously 0 >> AGs is invalid, and we hit the ASSERT. >> >> Fix this by skipping the last-ag-trim if there is only one AG, and >> add a new test to validate_ag_geometry() which offers a very specific, >> clear warning if the device (in dblocks) is smaller than the minimum >> allowed AG size. >> >> Reported-by: Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> >> --- >> >> diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >> index a687f385..da8c5986 100644 >> --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >> +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >> @@ -1038,6 +1038,15 @@ validate_ag_geometry( >> uint64_t agsize, >> uint64_t agcount) >> { >> + /* Is this device simply too small? */ >> + if (dblocks < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { >> + fprintf(stderr, >> + _("device (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), >> + (long long)dblocks, >> + (long long)XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)); >> + usage(); >> + } > > Ummm, shouldn't this be caught two checks later down by this: > > if (agsize > dblocks) { > fprintf(stderr, > _("agsize (%lld blocks) too big, data area is %lld blocks\n"), > (long long)agsize, (long long)dblocks); > usage(); > } No, because we hit an ASSERT before we ever called this validation function. The error this is trying to fix is essentially: Do not attempt to trim off the last/only AG in the filesystem. -Eric
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 05:29:17PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 9/14/20 5:12 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 01:26:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> When a too-small device is created with stripe geometry, we hit an > >> assert in align_ag_geometry(): > >> > >> # truncate --size=10444800 testfile > >> # mkfs.xfs -dsu=65536,sw=1 testfile > >> mkfs.xfs: xfs_mkfs.c:2834: align_ag_geometry: Assertion `cfg->agcount != 0' failed. > >> > >> This is because align_ag_geometry() finds that the size of the last > >> (only) AG is too small, and attempts to trim it off. Obviously 0 > >> AGs is invalid, and we hit the ASSERT. > >> > >> Fix this by skipping the last-ag-trim if there is only one AG, and > >> add a new test to validate_ag_geometry() which offers a very specific, > >> clear warning if the device (in dblocks) is smaller than the minimum > >> allowed AG size. > >> > >> Reported-by: Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> > >> --- > >> > >> diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > >> index a687f385..da8c5986 100644 > >> --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > >> +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c > >> @@ -1038,6 +1038,15 @@ validate_ag_geometry( > >> uint64_t agsize, > >> uint64_t agcount) > >> { > >> + /* Is this device simply too small? */ > >> + if (dblocks < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { > >> + fprintf(stderr, > >> + _("device (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), > >> + (long long)dblocks, > >> + (long long)XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)); > >> + usage(); > >> + } > > > > Ummm, shouldn't this be caught two checks later down by this: > > > > if (agsize > dblocks) { > > fprintf(stderr, > > _("agsize (%lld blocks) too big, data area is %lld blocks\n"), > > (long long)agsize, (long long)dblocks); > > usage(); > > } > > No, because we hit an ASSERT before we ever called this validation > function. Huh, we're supposed to have already validated the data device size is larger than the minimum supported before we try to align the Ag sizes to the data dev geometry. > The error this is trying to fix is essentially: Do not attempt to > trim off the last/only AG in the filesystem. But trimming *should never happen* for single AG filesystems. If we've got dblocks < minimum AG size for a single AG filesystem and we are only discovering that when we are doing AG alignment mods, then we've -failed to bounds check dblocks correctly-. We should have errored out long before we get to aligning AG geometry..... Yup, ok, see validate_datadev(), where we do minimum data subvolume size checks: if (cfg->dblocks < XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS) { fprintf(stderr, _("size %lld of data subvolume is too small, minimum %d blocks\n"), (long long)cfg->dblocks, XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS); usage(); } .... and there's the bug: #define XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS 100 That's wrong and that's the bug here: minimum data device size is 1 whole AG, which means that this should be: #define XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS(cfg) XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS((cfg)->blocklog) Cheers, Dave.
On 9/14/20 6:33 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 05:29:17PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 9/14/20 5:12 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 01:26:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>>> When a too-small device is created with stripe geometry, we hit an >>>> assert in align_ag_geometry(): >>>> >>>> # truncate --size=10444800 testfile >>>> # mkfs.xfs -dsu=65536,sw=1 testfile >>>> mkfs.xfs: xfs_mkfs.c:2834: align_ag_geometry: Assertion `cfg->agcount != 0' failed. >>>> >>>> This is because align_ag_geometry() finds that the size of the last >>>> (only) AG is too small, and attempts to trim it off. Obviously 0 >>>> AGs is invalid, and we hit the ASSERT. >>>> >>>> Fix this by skipping the last-ag-trim if there is only one AG, and >>>> add a new test to validate_ag_geometry() which offers a very specific, >>>> clear warning if the device (in dblocks) is smaller than the minimum >>>> allowed AG size. >>>> >>>> Reported-by: Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >>>> index a687f385..da8c5986 100644 >>>> --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >>>> +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c >>>> @@ -1038,6 +1038,15 @@ validate_ag_geometry( >>>> uint64_t agsize, >>>> uint64_t agcount) >>>> { >>>> + /* Is this device simply too small? */ >>>> + if (dblocks < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { >>>> + fprintf(stderr, >>>> + _("device (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), >>>> + (long long)dblocks, >>>> + (long long)XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)); >>>> + usage(); >>>> + } >>> >>> Ummm, shouldn't this be caught two checks later down by this: >>> >>> if (agsize > dblocks) { >>> fprintf(stderr, >>> _("agsize (%lld blocks) too big, data area is %lld blocks\n"), >>> (long long)agsize, (long long)dblocks); >>> usage(); >>> } >> >> No, because we hit an ASSERT before we ever called this validation >> function. > > Huh, we're supposed to have already validated the data device size > is larger than the minimum supported before we try to align the Ag > sizes to the data dev geometry. > >> The error this is trying to fix is essentially: Do not attempt to >> trim off the last/only AG in the filesystem. > > But trimming *should never happen* for single AG filesystems. If > we've got dblocks < minimum AG size for a single AG filesystem and > we are only discovering that when we are doing AG alignment mods, > then we've -failed to bounds check dblocks correctly-. We should > have errored out long before we get to aligning AG geometry..... > > Yup, ok, see validate_datadev(), where we do minimum data subvolume > size checks: > > if (cfg->dblocks < XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS) { > fprintf(stderr, > _("size %lld of data subvolume is too small, minimum %d blocks\n"), > (long long)cfg->dblocks, XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS); > usage(); > } > > .... and there's the bug: > > #define XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS 100 ew. Ok, I had missed this, yuk. Thanks, I'll resend. Thanks, -Eric > > That's wrong and that's the bug here: minimum data device > size is 1 whole AG, which means that this should be: > > #define XFS_MIN_DATA_BLOCKS(cfg) XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS((cfg)->blocklog) > > Cheers, > > Dave. >
diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c index a687f385..da8c5986 100644 --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c @@ -1038,6 +1038,15 @@ validate_ag_geometry( uint64_t agsize, uint64_t agcount) { + /* Is this device simply too small? */ + if (dblocks < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { + fprintf(stderr, + _("device (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), + (long long)dblocks, + (long long)XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)); + usage(); + } + if (agsize < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(blocklog)) { fprintf(stderr, _("agsize (%lld blocks) too small, need at least %lld blocks\n"), @@ -2827,11 +2836,12 @@ validate: * and drop the blocks. */ if (cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize != 0 && + cfg->agcount > 1 && (cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize < XFS_AG_MIN_BLOCKS(cfg->blocklog))) { +printf("%d %d %d\n", cfg->dblocks, cfg->agsize, cfg->dblocks % cfg->agsize); ASSERT(!cli_opt_set(&dopts, D_AGCOUNT)); cfg->dblocks = (xfs_rfsblock_t)((cfg->agcount - 1) * cfg->agsize); cfg->agcount--; - ASSERT(cfg->agcount != 0); } validate_ag_geometry(cfg->blocklog, cfg->dblocks,
When a too-small device is created with stripe geometry, we hit an assert in align_ag_geometry(): # truncate --size=10444800 testfile # mkfs.xfs -dsu=65536,sw=1 testfile mkfs.xfs: xfs_mkfs.c:2834: align_ag_geometry: Assertion `cfg->agcount != 0' failed. This is because align_ag_geometry() finds that the size of the last (only) AG is too small, and attempts to trim it off. Obviously 0 AGs is invalid, and we hit the ASSERT. Fix this by skipping the last-ag-trim if there is only one AG, and add a new test to validate_ag_geometry() which offers a very specific, clear warning if the device (in dblocks) is smaller than the minimum allowed AG size. Reported-by: Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> ---