[Ocfs2-tools-devel] [PATCH] mount.ocfs2: return -EROFS if file system is readonly

[piaojun]

Hi Joseph,

On 2017/12/28 9:11, Joseph Qi wrote:
> 
> 
> On 17/12/27 17:12, piaojun wrote:
>> If metadata is corrupted such as 'invalid inode block', we will get
>> -EROFS by calling 'mount()'. In this situation we need fix it by fsck,
>> and mount again rather than doing meaningless retry.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jun Piao <piaojun at huawei.com>
>> ---
>>  mount.ocfs2/mount.ocfs2.c | 13 ++++++++++---
>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mount.ocfs2/mount.ocfs2.c b/mount.ocfs2/mount.ocfs2.c
>> index e3d8871..1ab07ac 100644
>> --- a/mount.ocfs2/mount.ocfs2.c
>> +++ b/mount.ocfs2/mount.ocfs2.c
>> @@ -434,8 +434,15 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>>  			o2cb_complete_group_join(&cluster, &desc, errno);
>>  		}
>>  		block_signals (SIG_UNBLOCK);
>> -		com_err(progname, ret, "while mounting %s on %s. Check 'dmesg' "
>> -			"for more information on this error.", mo.dev, mo.dir);
>> +		if (ret == -EROFS)
>> +			com_err(progname, 0, "file system is now readonly due to "
>> +				"on-disk corruption while mounting %s on %s, please "
>> +				"fix this by fsck.ocfs2 and then retry mounting",
>> +				mo.dev, mo.dir);
> Could we use a meaningful error code instead of 0?
> 
> Thanks,
> Joseph

I looked over 'ocfs2_err.et', and did not find a suitable error code.
Should we define a new error code like this?

--
ec OCFS2_ET_CORRUPT_INODE_BLOCK,
"Inode block is corrupt"
--

thanks,
Jun

>> +		else
>> +			com_err(progname, OCFS2_ET_INTERNAL_FAILURE,
>> +				"while mounting %s on %s. Check 'dmesg' for more "
>> +				"information on this error.", mo.dev, mo.dir);
>>  		goto bail;
>>  	}
>>  	if (group_join) {
>> @@ -478,5 +485,5 @@ bail:
>>  	if (opts_string)
>>  		free(opts_string);
>>
>> -	return ret ? 1 : 0;
>> +	return ret;
>>  }
>>
>