On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:33 PM Shijie Huang <
shijie(a)amperemail.onmicrosoft.com> wrote:
> 在 2023/11/6 13:16, HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) 写道:
>> On 2023/11/06 14:04, HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) wrote:
>>> On 2023/11/03 18:45, Shijie Huang wrote:
>>>
>>>>> +summary_inode_page(ulong page)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + int node;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!is_page_ptr(page, NULL))
>>>>> + error(FATAL, "Invalid inode page(0x%lx)\n",
page);
>>> I don't remember the detail of xarray, but my cacheutils extension
>>> module also checks this without any error, in its callback function [1].
>>> So how about implementing like this?
>> in the first place, dump_inode_page() for "files -p" also checks this
>> first without any error. I think we can follow this.
>>
>>
https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/blob/master/memory.c#L6891
>
> okay. no problem.
>
>
Seems not enough.
crash> files -n ffff8ea84c130938
INODE NRPAGES
ffff8ea84c130938 62527
files: do_xarray: callback operation failed: entry: 1 item: 0
crash>
That is why I would suggest using the 'error(FATAL,...)' instead of the
'return':
https://lists.crash-utility.osci.io/archives/list/devel@lists.crash-utili...
Or ignore this output? Any thoughts?
Then "files -p" option also emits the same error?
Is that /proc/kcore? What is the kernel version?
Thanks,
Kazu