linux-ext4 - Re: ext3: slow symlink corruption on umount...

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:54:23 -0700
From:	Arthur Jones <ajones@...erbed.com>
To:	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	sct@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext3: slow symlink corruption on umount...

Some additional info -- and attempting to cast a wider
net on the CC:

I do not see the long symlink corruption with mount -o data=writeback
and we've now seen a couple cases where the symlink corruption
does not require a umount...

Arthur

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:37:34AM -0700, Arthur Jones wrote:
> Hi All,  I'm seeing slow symlink corruption on ext3 on linux-2.6.27,
> yesterday's linux-2.6 git tree and 2.6.9 RHEL4.7.  I.e. every kernel
> I've tried I see this effect.  To reproduce this, I need:
> 
> * 250MB + tar file in memory (tmpfs or in the buffer cache)
> * long symlinks in the tar file (over 60 characters)
> * umount immediately after untarring
> 
> What I see is that the symlinks are corrupted, e.g.:
> 
> # ls -l etc/vmware-vix-disklib
> etc/vmware-vix-disklib -> ??f
> 
> fsck shows:
> 
> Symlink /etc/vmware-vix-disklib (inode #16454) is invalid.
> 
> Debugfs shows:
> 
> debugfs:  stat <16454>
> Inode: 16454   Type: symlink    Mode:  0777   Flags: 0x0   Generation: 1431972005
> User:     0   Group:     0   Size: 65
> File ACL: 0    Directory ACL: 0
> Links: 1   Blockcount: 8
> Fragment:  Address: 0    Number: 0    Size: 0
> ctime: 0x4900ac69 -- Thu Oct 23 09:55:05 2008
> atime: 0x4900ac84 -- Thu Oct 23 09:55:32 2008
> mtime: 0x4900ac69 -- Thu Oct 23 09:55:05 2008
> BLOCKS:
> (0):56034
> TOTAL: 1
> 
> I'm still tracking down exactly what's going on.  Anyone seen
> anything like this before?  ext2 does not show this effect (I've
> not tried ext4).  It happens when the backing block device is
> a SATA drive or flash.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Arthur
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html