Thread (54 messages) 54 messages, 4 authors, 2021-08-19

Re: [PATCH v6 21/21] docs: Document the FAN_FS_ERROR event

From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Date: 2021-08-16 16:40:55
Also in: linux-api, linux-fsdevel

On Thu 12-08-21 17:40:10, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
Document the FAN_FS_ERROR event for user administrators and user space
developers.

Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <redacted>
<snip>
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/filesystem-monitoring.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/filesystem-monitoring.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..b03093567a93
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/filesystem-monitoring.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+====================================
+File system Monitoring with fanotify
+====================================
+
+File system Error Reporting
+===========================
+
+fanotify supports the FAN_FS_ERROR mark for file system-wide error
   ^ Capital 'F'.                     ^^^ I'd rather write "event type".
+reporting.  It is meant to be used by file system health monitoring
+daemons who listen on that interface and take actions (notify sysadmin,
           ^^^ which  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ for these events
+start recovery) when a file system problem is detected by the kernel.
+
+By design, A FAN_FS_ERROR notification exposes sufficient information for a
+monitoring tool to know a problem in the file system has happened.  It
+doesn't necessarily provide a user space application with semantics to
+verify an IO operation was successfully executed.  That is outside of
+scope of this feature. Instead, it is only meant as a framework for
+early file system problem detection and reporting recovery tools.
+
+When a file system operation fails, it is common for dozens of kernel
+errors to cascade after the initial failure, hiding the original failure
+log, which is usually the most useful debug data to troubleshoot the
+problem.  For this reason, FAN_FS_ERROR only reports the first error that
+occurred since the last notification, and it simply counts addition
							      ^^^ additional
+errors.  This ensures that the most important piece of error information
+is never lost.
+
+FAN_FS_ERROR requires the fanotify group to be setup with the
+FAN_REPORT_FID flag.
+
+At the time of this writing, the only file system that emits FAN_FS_ERROR
+notifications is Ext4.
+
+A user space example code is provided at ``samples/fanotify/fs-monitor.c``.
+
+A FAN_FS_ERROR Notification has the following format::
+
+  [ Notification Metadata (Mandatory) ]
+  [ Generic Error Record  (Mandatory) ]
+  [ FID record            (Mandatory) ]
+
+Generic error record
+--------------------
+
+The generic error record provides enough information for a file system
+agnostic tool to learn about a problem in the file system, without
+providing any additional details about the problem.  This record is
+identified by ``struct fanotify_event_info_header.info_type`` being set
+to FAN_EVENT_INFO_TYPE_ERROR.
+
+  struct fanotify_event_info_error {
+	struct fanotify_event_info_header hdr;
+	__s32 error;
+	__u32 error_count;
+  };
+
+The `error` field identifies the type of error. `error_count` count
+tracks the number of errors that occurred and were suppressed to
+preserve the original error, since the last notification.
So is 'error' expected to be errno? Or is that some fs-specific error
identifier? Will it be positive (i.e. real errno) or negative (as errno is
usually passed in the kernel)? I think it should be specified here.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara [off-list ref]
SUSE Labs, CR
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help