linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] f2fs: ratelimit recovery messages

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 28 May 2019 08:54:50 +0530
From:   Sahitya Tummala <stummala@...eaurora.org>
To:     Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
Cc:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] f2fs: ratelimit recovery messages

On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:17:59AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Sahitya,
> 
> On 2019/5/28 11:05, Sahitya Tummala wrote:
> > Hi Chao,
> > 
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 09:23:15AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> >> Hi Sahitya,
> >>
> >> On 2019/5/27 21:10, Sahitya Tummala wrote:
> >>> Ratelimit the recovery logs, which are expected in case
> >>> of sudden power down and which could result into too
> >>> many prints.
> >>
> >> FYI
> >>
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/973837/
> >>
> >> IMO, we need those logs to provide evidence during trouble-shooting of file data
> >> corruption or file missing problem...
> >>
> > In one of the logs, I have noticed there were ~400 recovery prints in the
> 
> I think its order of magnitudes is not such bad, if there is redundant logs such
> as the one in do_recover_data(), we can improve it.
> 
Sure, let me check it.

> > kernel bootup. I noticed your patch above and with that now we can always get
> > the error returned by f2fs_recover_fsync_data(), which should be good enough
> > for knowing the status of recovered files I thought. Do you think we need
> > individually each file status as well?
> 
> Yes, I think so, we need them for the detailed info. :)
> 
Sure, got it.

> Thanks,
> 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> >> So I suggest we can keep log as it is in recover_dentry/recover_inode, and for
> >> the log in do_recover_data, we can record recovery info [isize_kept,
> >> recovered_count, err ...] into struct fsync_inode_entry, and print them in
> >> batch, how do you think?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@...eaurora.org>
> >>> ---
> >>> v2:
> >>>  - fix minor formatting and add new line for printk
> >>>
> >>>  fs/f2fs/recovery.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> >>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
> >>> index e04f82b..60d7652 100644
> >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
> >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
> >>> @@ -188,8 +188,8 @@ static int recover_dentry(struct inode *inode, struct page *ipage,
> >>>  		name = "<encrypted>";
> >>>  	else
> >>>  		name = raw_inode->i_name;
> >>> -	f2fs_msg(inode->i_sb, KERN_NOTICE,
> >>> -			"%s: ino = %x, name = %s, dir = %lx, err = %d",
> >>> +	printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE
> >>> +			"%s: ino = %x, name = %s, dir = %lx, err = %d\n",
> >>>  			__func__, ino_of_node(ipage), name,
> >>>  			IS_ERR(dir) ? 0 : dir->i_ino, err);
> >>>  	return err;
> >>> @@ -292,8 +292,8 @@ static int recover_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *page)
> >>>  	else
> >>>  		name = F2FS_INODE(page)->i_name;
> >>>  
> >>> -	f2fs_msg(inode->i_sb, KERN_NOTICE,
> >>> -		"recover_inode: ino = %x, name = %s, inline = %x",
> >>> +	printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE
> >>> +			"recover_inode: ino = %x, name = %s, inline = %x\n",
> >>>  			ino_of_node(page), name, raw->i_inline);
> >>>  	return 0;
> >>>  }
> >>> @@ -642,11 +642,11 @@ static int do_recover_data(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct inode *inode,
> >>>  err:
> >>>  	f2fs_put_dnode(&dn);
> >>>  out:
> >>> -	f2fs_msg(sbi->sb, KERN_NOTICE,
> >>> -		"recover_data: ino = %lx (i_size: %s) recovered = %d, err = %d",
> >>> -		inode->i_ino,
> >>> -		file_keep_isize(inode) ? "keep" : "recover",
> >>> -		recovered, err);
> >>> +	printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE
> >>> +			"recover_data: ino = %lx (i_size: %s) recovered = %d, err = %d\n",
> >>> +			inode->i_ino,
> >>> +			file_keep_isize(inode) ? "keep" : "recover",
> >>> +			recovered, err);
> >>>  	return err;
> >>>  }
> >>>  
> >>>
> > 

-- 
--
Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.