On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 01:08:47AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 03:22:02PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c > > index f9ef3b2a332a..6ba57ccaa25f 100644 > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c > > @@ -747,6 +747,9 @@ xfs_buf_read_map( > > /* bad CRC means corrupted metadata */ > > if (error == -EFSBADCRC) > > error = -EFSCORRUPTED; > > + /* ENODATA == ENOATTR which confuses xattr layers */ > > + if (error == -ENODATA) > > + error = -EIO; > > I think we need to stop passing random errors through here (same > for the write side). Unless we have an explicit handler (which we > have for a tiny number of errors), passing random stuff we got through > and which higher layers use for their own purpose will cause trouble. > > Btw, your patch is timely as I've just seen something that probably > is the same root cause when running XFS on a device with messed up > PI, which is another of those cases where the block layer returns > "odd" error codes. Maybe xfs should translate bi_status into whatever error codes it wants directly instead of relying on blk_status_to_errno, which can change in subtle ways? Though how many of those status codes actually need a different error? BLK_STS_MEDIUM (ENODATA) and BLK_STS_NOTSUPP (EOPNOTSUPP) are the only ones that look (to me) like they could be confused easily. --D
