Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1551688

Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4 inode destroy

Show all headers | View raw

On 2017/1/5 7:35, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> 
> So how exactly how did we get into this state?  When we read the inode
> into memory, if i_nlink is zero, we declare the file system as
> corrupted immediately.
> 
> So I assume this is happening the on-disk i_links_count (which is read
> into inode->i_nlink) was too low.  So I think the way we should be
> handling this is in unlink and rename, before we let i_nlink drop to
> zero, we need to check to see if there are other dcache entries
> pointing at the inode.  If so, we need to call ext4_error(), and in
> the errors=continue case, return EFSCORRUPTED (aka EUCLEAN).
> 

diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
--- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
@@ -3662,6 +3662,11 @@ static int ext4_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry,
        }

        if (new.inode) {
+               if (new.inode->i_nlink == 0) {
+                       ext4_warning_inode(new.inode, "Removing file '%.*s' with no links",
+                                      new.dentry->d_name.len, new.dentry->d_name.name);
+                       set_nlink(new.inode, 1);
+               }
                ext4_dec_count(handle, new.inode);
                new.inode->i_ctime = ext4_current_time(new.inode);
        }

Because the filesystem have many errors, and the reason of i_nlink becomes zero is unknown,
the on-disk i_links_count was too low may be one reason.  I think we can add i_nlink check in
ext4_rename just like ext4_unlink did, it can avoid inversion under any case.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@huawei.com> - 2017-01-04 10:00 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4 inode destroy Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca> - 2017-01-04 23:10 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com> - 2017-01-05 00:00 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> - 2017-01-05 00:40 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@huawei.com> - 2017-01-05 08:30 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com> - 2017-01-05 19:50 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@huawei.com> - 2017-01-11 10:10 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> - 2017-01-11 16:40 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@huawei.com> - 2017-01-12 09:10 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> - 2017-01-12 18:10 +0100
              Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2017-01-13 04:50 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> - 2017-01-13 15:30 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4  inode destroy "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@huawei.com> - 2017-01-16 04:30 +0100

csiph-web