| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:23:15 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: Fix sys_sync() and fsync_super() reliability
On Wed 22-04-09 13:16:16, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 17:56 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > So far, do_sync() called:
> > sync_inodes(0);
> > sync_supers();
> > sync_filesystems(0);
> > sync_filesystems(1);
> > sync_inodes(1);
> >
> > This ordering makes it kind of hard for filesystems as sync_inodes(0) need not
> > submit all the IO (for example it skips inodes with I_SYNC set) so e.g. forcing
> > transaction to disk in ->sync_fs() is not really enough. Therefore sys_sync has
> > not been completely reliable on some filesystems (ext3, ext4, reiserfs, ocfs2
> > and others are hit by this) when racing e.g. with background writeback. A
> > similar problem hits also other filesystems (e.g. ext2) because of
> > write_supers() being called before the sync_inodes(1).
> >
> > Change the ordering of calls in do_sync() - this requires a new function
> > sync_blkdevs() to preserve the property that block devices are always synced
> > after write_super() / sync_fs() call.
> >
> > The same issue is fixed in __fsync_super() function used on umount /
> > remount read-only.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> > ---
> > fs/super.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > fs/sync.c | 3 ++-
> > include/linux/fs.h | 2 ++
> > 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
> > index 786fe7d..4f56333 100644
> > --- a/fs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/super.c
> > @@ -267,6 +267,7 @@ void __fsync_super(struct super_block *sb)
> > {
> > sync_inodes_sb(sb, 0);
> > vfs_dq_sync(sb);
> > + sync_inodes_sb(sb, 1);
> > lock_super(sb);
> > if (sb->s_dirt && sb->s_op->write_super)
> > sb->s_op->write_super(sb);
> > @@ -274,7 +275,6 @@ void __fsync_super(struct super_block *sb)
> > if (sb->s_op->sync_fs)
> > sb->s_op->sync_fs(sb, 1);
> > sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev);
> > - sync_inodes_sb(sb, 1);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -502,6 +502,29 @@ restart:
> > mutex_unlock(&mutex);
> > }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Sync all block devices underlying some superblock
> > + */
> > +void sync_blockdevs(void)
> > +{
> > + struct super_block *sb;
> > +
> > + spin_lock(&sb_lock);
> > +restart:
> > + list_for_each_entry(sb, &super_blocks, s_list) {
> > + sb->s_count++;
> > + spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> > + down_read(&sb->s_umount);
> > + if (sb->s_root)
> > + sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev);
> > + up_read(&sb->s_umount);
>
> What's the point of going to all this trouble of upping the sb->s_count,
> and grabbing sb->s_umount if there is no sb->s_bdev to sync in the first
> place?
Thanks for the comment. Yes, we could save something here. I can improve
this and similarly my next patch. I'll just wait till tomorrow whether
someone else does not have other comments...
>
> > + spin_lock(&sb_lock);
> > + if (__put_super_and_need_restart(sb))
> > + goto restart;
> > + }
> > + spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > /**
> > * get_super - get the superblock of a device
> > * @bdev: device to get the superblock for
> > diff --git a/fs/sync.c b/fs/sync.c
> > index 7abc65f..fa14e42 100644
> > --- a/fs/sync.c
> > +++ b/fs/sync.c
> > @@ -26,10 +26,11 @@ static void do_sync(unsigned long wait)
> > wakeup_pdflush(0);
> > sync_inodes(0); /* All mappings, inodes and their blockdevs */
> > vfs_dq_sync(NULL);
> > + sync_inodes(wait); /* Mappings, inodes and blockdevs, again. */
> > sync_supers(); /* Write the superblocks */
> > sync_filesystems(0); /* Start syncing the filesystems */
> > sync_filesystems(wait); /* Waitingly sync the filesystems */
> > - sync_inodes(wait); /* Mappings, inodes and blockdevs, again. */
> > + sync_blockdevs();
> > if (!wait)
> > printk("Emergency Sync complete\n");
> > if (unlikely(laptop_mode))
> > diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> > index 5bed436..4bad02e 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> > @@ -1942,6 +1942,7 @@ extern void bdput(struct block_device *);
> > extern struct block_device *open_by_devnum(dev_t, fmode_t);
> > extern void invalidate_bdev(struct block_device *);
> > extern int sync_blockdev(struct block_device *bdev);
> > +extern void sync_blockdevs(void);
> > extern struct super_block *freeze_bdev(struct block_device *);
> > extern void emergency_thaw_all(void);
> > extern int thaw_bdev(struct block_device *bdev, struct super_block *sb);
> > @@ -1951,6 +1952,7 @@ extern int fsync_no_super(struct block_device *);
> > #else
> > static inline void bd_forget(struct inode *inode) {}
> > static inline int sync_blockdev(struct block_device *bdev) { return 0; }
> > +static inline void sync_blockdevs(void) { }
> > static inline void invalidate_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) {}
> >
> > static inline struct super_block *freeze_bdev(struct block_device *sb)
> > --
> > 1.6.0.2
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists