[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181011152840.GB24099@magnolia>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 08:28:40 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fuse2fs: return proper exit code from fuse_main
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 03:43:36PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> Currently fuse2fs will always return 0 exit code indicating successful
> operation even though the mount failed either because we failed to
> properly read the file system in the first place, or the fuse_main()
> failed for whatever reason.
>
> Fix it by using the return code from fuse_main(), or return 32 in case
> we fail because the file system is corrupted, or we encountered a
> problem preventing us mounting the file system. 32 because this is a
> libmount exit code indicating mount failed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
> ---
> misc/fuse2fs.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/misc/fuse2fs.c b/misc/fuse2fs.c
> index 5c73895e..d7a0b668 100644
> --- a/misc/fuse2fs.c
> +++ b/misc/fuse2fs.c
> @@ -3720,7 +3720,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> struct fuse_args args = FUSE_ARGS_INIT(argc, argv);
> struct fuse2fs fctx;
> - errcode_t err;
> + errcode_t err = 0;
> char *logfile;
> char extra_args[BUFSIZ];
> int ret = 0, flags = EXT2_FLAG_64BITS | EXT2_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
> @@ -3753,6 +3753,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> fctx.err_fp = fopen(logfile, "a");
> if (!fctx.err_fp) {
> perror(logfile);
> + err = errno;
> goto out;
> }
> } else
> @@ -3766,7 +3767,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> }
>
> /* Start up the fs (while we still can use stdout) */
> - ret = 2;
> if (!fctx.ro)
> flags |= EXT2_FLAG_RW;
> err = ext2fs_open2(fctx.device, NULL, flags, 0, 0, unix_io_manager,
> @@ -3779,8 +3779,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> fctx.fs = global_fs;
> global_fs->priv_data = &fctx;
>
> - ret = 3;
> -
> if (ext2fs_has_feature_journal_needs_recovery(global_fs->super)) {
> if (!fctx.ro) {
> printf(_("%s: recovering journal\n"), fctx.device);
> @@ -3797,6 +3795,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> } else {
> printf("%s", _("Journal needs recovery; running "
> "`e2fsck -E journal_only' is required.\n"));
> + err = 1;
> goto out;
> }
> }
> @@ -3836,6 +3835,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> if (global_fs->super->s_state & EXT2_ERROR_FS) {
> printf("%s",
> _("Errors detected; running e2fsck is required.\n"));
> + err = 1;
> goto out;
> }
>
> @@ -3859,11 +3859,16 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> }
>
> pthread_mutex_init(&fctx.bfl, NULL);
> - fuse_main(args.argc, args.argv, &fs_ops, &fctx);
> + ret = fuse_main(args.argc, args.argv, &fs_ops, &fctx);
Hmmm, what /does/ fuse_main return? According to the libfuse github
site it returns 0 for success and "nonzero" for failure. The source
code seems to return 1 on failure (I think), but we probably ought to
set ret to 1 ("incorrect invocation or permissions") or 32 explicitly
just in case they ever change their minds...
> pthread_mutex_destroy(&fctx.bfl);
>
> - ret = 0;
> out:
> + /*
> + * Encountered error reading the file system. Return standard "mount
> + * failure" mount exit code (32).
> + */
> + if (err)
> + ret = 32;
...I guess "mount failure" for libext2fs problems is good enough, though
part of me thinks that we should return 1 if ext2fs_open can't open the
block device due to EPERM/EACCESS.
<shrug> OTOH "mount failure" is sufficiently vague to hide just about
anything behind. :)
--D
> if (global_fs) {
> err = ext2fs_close(global_fs);
> if (err)
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists