On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 08:21:37AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> We only flag corruptions for these two error codes, but ENODATA from the
> block layer means "critical medium error". I take that to mean the
> media has permanently lost whatever was persisted there, right?
It can also be a write error. But yes, it's what EIO indidcates in
general. Which is why I really think we should be doing something like
the patch below. But as I don't have the time to fully shephed this
I'm not trying to block this hack, even if I think the issue will
continue to byte us in the future.
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
index f9ef3b2a332a..0252faf038aa 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
@@ -1290,6 +1290,22 @@ xfs_bwrite(
return error;
}
+static int
+xfs_buf_bio_status(
+ struct bio *bio)
+{
+ switch (bio->bi_status) {
+ case BLK_STS_OK:
+ return 0;
+ case BLK_STS_NOSPC:
+ return -ENOSPC;
+ case BLK_STS_OFFLINE:
+ return -ENODEV;
+ default:
+ return -EIO;
+ }
+}
+
static void
xfs_buf_bio_end_io(
struct bio *bio)
@@ -1297,7 +1313,7 @@ xfs_buf_bio_end_io(
struct xfs_buf *bp = bio->bi_private;
if (bio->bi_status)
- xfs_buf_ioerror(bp, blk_status_to_errno(bio->bi_status));
+ xfs_buf_ioerror(bp, xfs_buf_bio_status(bio));
else if ((bp->b_flags & XBF_WRITE) && (bp->b_flags & XBF_ASYNC) &&
XFS_TEST_ERROR(false, bp->b_mount, XFS_ERRTAG_BUF_IOERROR))
xfs_buf_ioerror(bp, -EIO);
