[ Upstream commit 2f1aeab9fca1a5f583be1add175d1ee95c213cfa ]
When attempting to exclusive open a device which has no exclusive open
permission, such as a physical device associated with the flakey dm
device, the open operation will fail, resulting in a mount failure.
In this particular scenario, we erroneously return -EINVAL instead of the
correct error code provided by the bdev_open_by_path() function, which is
-EBUSY.
Fix this, by returning error code from the bdev_open_by_path() function.
With this correction, the mount error message will align with that of
ext4 and xfs.
Reviewed-by: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 7411055db5ce64f836aaffd422396af0075fdc99 ]
The unhandled case in btrfs_relocate_sys_chunks() loop is a corruption,
as it could be caused only by two impossible conditions:
- at first the search key is set up to look for a chunk tree item, with
offset -1, this is an inexact search and the key->offset will contain
the correct offset upon a successful search, a valid chunk tree item
cannot have an offset -1
- after first successful search, the found_key corresponds to a chunk
item, the offset is decremented by 1 before the next loop, it's
impossible to find a chunk item there due to alignment and size
constraints
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit ae6bd7f9b46a29af52ebfac25d395757e2031d0d ]
At contains_pending_extent() the value of the end offset of a chunk we
found in the device's allocation state io tree is inclusive, so when
we calculate the length we pass to the in_range() macro, we must sum
1 to the expression "physical_end - physical_offset".
In practice the wrong calculation should be harmless as chunks sizes
are never 1 byte and we should never have 1 byte ranges of unallocated
space. Nevertheless fix the wrong calculation.
Reported-by: Alex Lyakas <alex.lyakas@zadara.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/CAOcd+r30e-f4R-5x-S7sV22RJPe7+pgwherA6xqN2_qe7o4XTg@mail.gmail.com/
Fixes: 1c11b63eff2a ("btrfs: replace pending/pinned chunks lists with io tree")
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 6.1+
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
commit 7d410d5efe04e42a6cd959bfe6d59d559fdf8b25 upstream.
When getting a chunk map, at btrfs_get_chunk_map(), we do some sanity
checks to verify we found a chunk map and that map found covers the
logical address the caller passed in. However the messages aren't very
clear in the sense that don't mention the issue is with a chunk map and
one of them prints the 'length' argument as if it were the end offset of
the requested range (while the in the string format we use %llu-%llu
which suggests a range, and the second %llu-%llu is actually a range for
the chunk map). So improve these two details in the error messages.
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.4+
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit 5fba5a571858ce2d787fdaf55814e42725bfa895 upstream.
At btrfs_get_chunk_map() we get the extent map for the chunk that contains
the given logical address stored in the 'logical' argument. Then we do
sanity checks to verify the extent map contains the logical address. One
of these checks verifies if the extent map covers a range with an end
offset behind the target logical address - however this check has an
off-by-one error since it will consider an extent map whose start offset
plus its length matches the target logical address as inclusive, while
the fact is that the last byte it covers is behind the target logical
address (by 1).
So fix this condition by using '<=' rather than '<' when comparing the
extent map's "start + length" against the target logical address.
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
