From: Zizhi Wo <wozizhi@huawei.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: <jack@suse.com>, <brauner@kernel.org>, <axboe@kernel.dk>,
<hch@lst.de>, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <yukuai3@huawei.com>,
<yangerkun@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: Add additional checks for block devices during mount
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2025 12:46:32 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3bec1e49-e833-4e51-8bf5-3fa7f3defa86@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250719041709.GI2580412@ZenIV>
在 2025/7/19 12:17, Al Viro 写道:
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 10:44:03AM +0800, Zizhi Wo wrote:
>
>> mkfs.ext4 -F /dev/sdb
>> mount /dev/sdb /mnt
>> mknod /dev/test b 8 16 # [sdb 8:16]
>> echo 1 > /sys/block/sdb/device/delete
>> mount /dev/test /mnt1 # -> mount success
>>
>> Therefore, it is necessary to add an extra check. Solve this problem by
>> checking disk_live() in super_s_dev_test().
>
> That smells like a wrong approach... You are counting upon the failure
> of setup_bdev_super() after the thing is forced on the "no reuse" path,
> and that's too convoluted and brittle...
>
Since this problem can only occur in the superblock reuse scenario, and
the .test function used in sget_fc() for bdev filesystems is
super_s_dev_test(), I considered adding an additional condition check
within that function.
I'm wondering if there's a better way to handle this...
Thanks,
Zizhi Wo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-19 4:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-19 2:44 Zizhi Wo
2025-07-19 4:17 ` Al Viro
2025-07-19 4:46 ` Zizhi Wo [this message]
2025-07-19 12:32 ` kernel test robot
2025-07-21 1:20 ` Zizhi Wo
2025-07-21 6:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-21 7:05 ` Zizhi Wo
2025-07-23 12:51 ` Christian Brauner
2025-07-24 7:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-07-24 11:26 ` Zizhi Wo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3bec1e49-e833-4e51-8bf5-3fa7f3defa86@huawei.com \
--to=wozizhi@huawei.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®