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:	Thu, 12 Dec 2013 10:41:37 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Ted Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Akira Fujita <a-fujita@...jp.nec.com>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ext4: Fix deadlock when writing in ENOSPC conditions

On Thu 12-12-13 14:51:16, Zheng Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:14:00AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Akira-san has been reporting rare deadlocks of his machine when running
> > xfstests test 269 on ext4 filesystem. The problem turned out to be in
> > ext4_da_reserve_metadata() and ext4_da_reserve_space() which called
> > ext4_should_retry_alloc() while holding i_data_sem. Since
> > ext4_should_retry_alloc() can force a transaction commit, this is a
> > lock ordering violation and leads to deadlocks.
> > 
> > Fix the problem by just removing the retry loops. These functions should
> > just report ENOSPC to the caller (e.g. ext4_da_write_begin()) and that
> > function must take care of retrying after dropping all necessary locks.
> > 
> > Reported-and-tested-by: Akira Fujita <a-fujita@...jp.nec.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> 
> Thanks for fixing this.  The patch looks good to me.  You can add:
> Reviewed-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>
> 
> BTW, I have met a deadlock which is caused by ext4_da_reserve_space()
> in our product system.  The calltrace information looks like this.  So
> I want to make sure it is the root cause.  But I couldn't reproduce the
> problem with running xfstest #269.  Could you please tell me how to
> reproduce the deadlock?
  I couldn't reproduce it either but Akira was able to reproduce it (but it
took him a long time as well).

> FWIW, I think we should backport this patch to stable kernel.
  Agreed.

								Honza

> > ---
> >  fs/ext4/inode.c | 12 ------------
> >  1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > index 075763474118..61d49ff22c81 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > @@ -1206,7 +1206,6 @@ static int ext4_journalled_write_end(struct file *file,
> >   */
> >  static int ext4_da_reserve_metadata(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblock)
> >  {
> > -	int retries = 0;
> >  	struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb);
> >  	struct ext4_inode_info *ei = EXT4_I(inode);
> >  	unsigned int md_needed;
> > @@ -1218,7 +1217,6 @@ static int ext4_da_reserve_metadata(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblock)
> >  	 * in order to allocate nrblocks
> >  	 * worse case is one extent per block
> >  	 */
> > -repeat:
> >  	spin_lock(&ei->i_block_reservation_lock);
> >  	/*
> >  	 * ext4_calc_metadata_amount() has side effects, which we have
> > @@ -1238,10 +1236,6 @@ repeat:
> >  		ei->i_da_metadata_calc_len = save_len;
> >  		ei->i_da_metadata_calc_last_lblock = save_last_lblock;
> >  		spin_unlock(&ei->i_block_reservation_lock);
> > -		if (ext4_should_retry_alloc(inode->i_sb, &retries)) {
> > -			cond_resched();
> > -			goto repeat;
> > -		}
> >  		return -ENOSPC;
> >  	}
> >  	ei->i_reserved_meta_blocks += md_needed;
> > @@ -1255,7 +1249,6 @@ repeat:
> >   */
> >  static int ext4_da_reserve_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblock)
> >  {
> > -	int retries = 0;
> >  	struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb);
> >  	struct ext4_inode_info *ei = EXT4_I(inode);
> >  	unsigned int md_needed;
> > @@ -1277,7 +1270,6 @@ static int ext4_da_reserve_space(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblock)
> >  	 * in order to allocate nrblocks
> >  	 * worse case is one extent per block
> >  	 */
> > -repeat:
> >  	spin_lock(&ei->i_block_reservation_lock);
> >  	/*
> >  	 * ext4_calc_metadata_amount() has side effects, which we have
> > @@ -1297,10 +1289,6 @@ repeat:
> >  		ei->i_da_metadata_calc_len = save_len;
> >  		ei->i_da_metadata_calc_last_lblock = save_last_lblock;
> >  		spin_unlock(&ei->i_block_reservation_lock);
> > -		if (ext4_should_retry_alloc(inode->i_sb, &retries)) {
> > -			cond_resched();
> > -			goto repeat;
> > -		}
> >  		dquot_release_reservation_block(inode, EXT4_C2B(sbi, 1));
> >  		return -ENOSPC;
> >  	}
> > -- 
> > 1.8.1.4
> > 
> > --
> > 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
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists