RepoMirrors/btrfs-progs
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/kdave/btrfs-progs synced 2024-12-24 23:22:27 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

btrfs-progs: fsck: Fix a false metadata extent warning

Browse Source 
At least 2 user from mail list reported btrfsck reported false alert of
"bad metadata [XXXX,YYYY) crossing stripe boundary".

While the reported number are all inside the same 64K boundary.
After some check, all the false alert have the same bytenr feature,
which can be divided by stripe size (64K).

The result seems to be initial 'max_size' can be 0, causing 'start' +
'max_size' - 1, to cross the stripe boundary.

Fix it by always update extent_record->cross_stripe when the
extent_record is updated, to avoid temporary false alert to be reported.

Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
This commit is contained in:
Qu Wenruo 2016-03-31 10:19:34 +08:00 committed by David Sterba
parent 1a9df1c68b
commit 12234d0202
1 changed files with 5 additions and 5 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
cmds-check.c
View File

@ -4579,9 +4579,9 @@ static int add_extent_rec(struct cache_tree *extent_cache,
* As now stripe_len is fixed to BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN, just check
* it.
*/
if (metadata && check_crossing_stripes(rec->start,
rec->max_size))
rec->crossing_stripes = 1;
if (metadata)
rec->crossing_stripes = check_crossing_stripes(
rec->start, rec->max_size);
check_extent_type(rec);
maybe_free_extent_rec(extent_cache, rec);
return ret;
@ -4641,8 +4641,8 @@ static int add_extent_rec(struct cache_tree *extent_cache,
}
if (metadata)
if (check_crossing_stripes(rec->start, rec->max_size))
rec->crossing_stripes = 1;
rec->crossing_stripes = check_crossing_stripes(rec->start,
rec->max_size);
check_extent_type(rec);
return ret;
}