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:	Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:28:26 +0800
From:	Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
To:	Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
CC:	<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] f2fs: fix to avoid data update racing between GC and
 DIO

On 2016/7/10 0:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 11:50:02PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>> Hi Jaegeuk,
>>
>> On 2016/7/8 11:19, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> Hi Chao,
>>>
>>> Could you take a look at this in xfstests/generic/013?
>>>
>>> [  502.480850] ======================================================
>>> [  502.480864] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
>>> [  502.480877] 4.7.0-rc1+ #124 Tainted: G           OE  
>>> [  502.480886] -------------------------------------------------------
>>> [  502.480897] fsstress/10729 is trying to acquire lock:
>>> [  502.480906]  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#18){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81299c3b>] do_blockdev_direct_IO+0x1db/0x2310
>>> [  502.480948] 
>>> [  502.480948] but task is already holding lock:
>>> [  502.480959]  (&fi->dio_rwsem){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffffc081e2b1>] f2fs_direct_IO+0xd1/0x3d0 [f2fs]
>>> [  502.481003] 
>>> [  502.481003] which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>> [  502.481003] 
>>> [  502.481018] 
>>> [  502.481018] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>>> [  502.481030] 
>>> [  502.481030] -> #1 (&fi->dio_rwsem){.+.+.+}:
>>> [  502.481054]        [<ffffffff810e51c3>] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x220
>>> [  502.481071]        [<ffffffff818d1921>] down_read+0x51/0xa0
>>> [  502.481089]        [<ffffffffc081e2b1>] f2fs_direct_IO+0xd1/0x3d0 [f2fs]
>>> [  502.481114]        [<ffffffff811c34c7>] generic_file_direct_write+0xa7/0x160
>>> [  502.481133]        [<ffffffff811c363d>] __generic_file_write_iter+0xbd/0x1e0
>>> [  502.481149]        [<ffffffffc080437b>] f2fs_file_write_iter+0xdb/0x100 [f2fs]
>>> [  502.481173]        [<ffffffff81253a88>] __vfs_write+0xc8/0x140
>>> [  502.481190]        [<ffffffff81254c55>] vfs_write+0xb5/0x1b0
>>> [  502.481205]        [<ffffffff81255fe9>] SyS_write+0x49/0xa0
>>> [  502.481220]        [<ffffffff818d4100>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x23/0xc1
>>> [  502.481236] 
>>> [  502.481236] -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#18){+.+.+.}:
>>> [  502.481264]        [<ffffffff810e481c>] __lock_acquire+0x161c/0x1940
>>> [  502.481280]        [<ffffffff810e51c3>] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x220
>>> [  502.481296]        [<ffffffff818d1b9a>] down_write+0x5a/0xc0
>>> [  502.481312]        [<ffffffff81299c3b>] do_blockdev_direct_IO+0x1db/0x2310
>>> [  502.481328]        [<ffffffff8129bdaa>] __blockdev_direct_IO+0x3a/0x40
>>> [  502.481344]        [<ffffffffc081e2e4>] f2fs_direct_IO+0x104/0x3d0 [f2fs]
>>> [  502.481368]        [<ffffffff811c40a9>] generic_file_read_iter+0x689/0x7e0
>>> [  502.481384]        [<ffffffff812545d1>] __vfs_read+0xc1/0x130
>>> [  502.481399]        [<ffffffff81254af1>] vfs_read+0x91/0x140
>>> [  502.481414]        [<ffffffff81255f49>] SyS_read+0x49/0xa0
>>> [  502.481429]        [<ffffffff818d4100>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x23/0xc1
>>> [  502.481445] 
>>> [  502.481445] other info that might help us debug this:
>>> [  502.481445] 
>>> [  502.481459]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>> [  502.481459] 
>>> [  502.481726]        CPU0                    CPU1
>>> [  502.481987]        ----                    ----
>>> [  502.482242]   lock(&fi->dio_rwsem);
>>> [  502.482501]                                lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#18);
>>> [  502.482765]                                lock(&fi->dio_rwsem);
>>> [  502.483025]   lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#18);
>>
>> Seems we will suffer ABBA deadlock:
>>
>> writer					reader
>> - f2fs_file_write_iter
>>  - down_write(&inode->i_rwsem)
>>  - __generic_file_write_iter
>>   - generic_file_direct_write
>>    - f2fs_direct_IO
>> 					- generic_file_read_iter
>> 					 - f2fs_direct_IO
>> 					 - down_read(&fi->dio_rwsem)
>> 					  - __blockdev_direct_IO
>> 					   - do_blockdev_direct_IO
>> 					    - down_write(&inode->i_rwsem)
>> 					
>>     - down_read(&fi->dio_rwsem)
>>
>> What about splitting dio_rwsem to rdio_rwsem/wdio_rwsem for reader/writer to
>> avoid deadlock?
> 
> Hmm, how about inode_trylock in GC?

If we reuse inode->i_rwsem here, we will suffer the same issue when we remove
i_rwsem lock in dio writer or dio reader for better concurrency.

So I think it's better to use separate lock to just fix this issue.

Thanks,

> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>> [  502.483285] 
>>> [  502.483285]  *** DEADLOCK ***
>>> [  502.483285] 
>>> [  502.484018] 1 lock held by fsstress/10729:
>>> [  502.484262]  #0:  (&fi->dio_rwsem){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffffc081e2b1>] f2fs_direct_IO+0xd1/0x3d0 [f2fs]
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 12:49:12PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>> From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
>>>>
>>>> Datas in file can be operated by GC and DIO simultaneously, so we will
>>>> face race case as below:
>>>>
>>>> For write case:
>>>> Thread A				Thread B
>>>> - generic_file_direct_write
>>>>  - invalidate_inode_pages2_range
>>>>  - f2fs_direct_IO
>>>>   - do_blockdev_direct_IO
>>>>    - do_direct_IO
>>>>     - get_more_blocks
>>>> 					- f2fs_gc
>>>> 					 - do_garbage_collect
>>>> 					  - gc_data_segment
>>>> 					   - move_data_page
>>>> 					    - do_write_data_page
>>>> 					    migrate data block to new block address
>>>>    - dio_bio_submit
>>>>    update user data to old block address
>>>>
>>>> For read case:
>>>> Thread A                                Thread B
>>>> - generic_file_direct_write
>>>>  - invalidate_inode_pages2_range
>>>>  - f2fs_direct_IO
>>>>   - do_blockdev_direct_IO
>>>>    - do_direct_IO
>>>>     - get_more_blocks
>>>> 					- f2fs_balance_fs
>>>> 					 - f2fs_gc
>>>> 					  - do_garbage_collect
>>>> 					   - gc_data_segment
>>>> 					    - move_data_page
>>>> 					     - do_write_data_page
>>>> 					     migrate data block to new block address
>>>> 					  - write_checkpoint
>>>> 					   - do_checkpoint
>>>> 					    - clear_prefree_segments
>>>> 					     - f2fs_issue_discard
>>>>                                              discard old block adress
>>>>    - dio_bio_submit
>>>>    update user buffer from obsolete block address
>>>>
>>>> In order to fix this, for one file, we should let DIO and GC getting exclusion
>>>> against with each other.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v3: use semaphore to avoid racing in between read dio and write dio.
>>>>  fs/f2fs/data.c  |  4 ++++
>>>>  fs/f2fs/f2fs.h  |  1 +
>>>>  fs/f2fs/gc.c    | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>>  fs/f2fs/super.c |  1 +
>>>>  4 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>>> index b6fd5bd..19197bb 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>>> @@ -1712,6 +1712,7 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	struct address_space *mapping = iocb->ki_filp->f_mapping;
>>>>  	struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
>>>> +	struct f2fs_inode_info *fi = F2FS_I(inode);
>>>>  	size_t count = iov_iter_count(iter);
>>>>  	loff_t offset = iocb->ki_pos;
>>>>  	int err;
>>>> @@ -1727,7 +1728,10 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter)
>>>>  
>>>>  	trace_f2fs_direct_IO_enter(inode, offset, count, iov_iter_rw(iter));
>>>>  
>>>> +	down_read(&fi->dio_rwsem);
>>>>  	err = blockdev_direct_IO(iocb, inode, iter, get_data_block_dio);
>>>> +	up_read(&fi->dio_rwsem);
>>>> +
>>>>  	if (iov_iter_rw(iter) == WRITE) {
>>>>  		if (err > 0)
>>>>  			set_inode_flag(inode, FI_UPDATE_WRITE);
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>> index bf9a13a..2e439ec 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>> @@ -474,6 +474,7 @@ struct f2fs_inode_info {
>>>>  	struct list_head inmem_pages;	/* inmemory pages managed by f2fs */
>>>>  	struct mutex inmem_lock;	/* lock for inmemory pages */
>>>>  	struct extent_tree *extent_tree;	/* cached extent_tree entry */
>>>> +	struct rw_semaphore dio_rwsem;	/* avoid racing between dio and gc */
>>>>  };
>>>>  
>>>>  static inline void get_extent_info(struct extent_info *ext,
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>> index c612137..a9bfb8d 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>> @@ -755,12 +755,25 @@ next_step:
>>>>  		/* phase 3 */
>>>>  		inode = find_gc_inode(gc_list, dni.ino);
>>>>  		if (inode) {
>>>> +			struct f2fs_inode_info *fi = F2FS_I(inode);
>>>> +			bool locked = false;
>>>> +
>>>> +			if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) {
>>>> +				if (!down_write_trylock(&fi->dio_rwsem))
>>>> +					continue;
>>>> +				locked = true;
>>>> +			}
>>>> +
>>>>  			start_bidx = start_bidx_of_node(nofs, inode)
>>>>  								+ ofs_in_node;
>>>>  			if (f2fs_encrypted_inode(inode) && S_ISREG(inode->i_mode))
>>>>  				move_encrypted_block(inode, start_bidx);
>>>>  			else
>>>>  				move_data_page(inode, start_bidx, gc_type);
>>>> +
>>>> +			if (locked)
>>>> +				up_write(&fi->dio_rwsem);
>>>> +
>>>>  			stat_inc_data_blk_count(sbi, 1, gc_type);
>>>>  		}
>>>>  	}
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>>> index edd1b35..dde57fb 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>>> @@ -579,6 +579,7 @@ static struct inode *f2fs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
>>>>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fi->gdirty_list);
>>>>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fi->inmem_pages);
>>>>  	mutex_init(&fi->inmem_lock);
>>>> +	init_rwsem(&fi->dio_rwsem);
>>>>  
>>>>  	/* Will be used by directory only */
>>>>  	fi->i_dir_level = F2FS_SB(sb)->dir_level;
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.7.2
> 
> .
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ