linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 4/4] jbd: fix error handling for checkpoint io (rebased)

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]

Message-ID: <482D61BD.2040700@hitachi.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 May 2008 19:28:13 +0900
From:	Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>
To:	Josef Bacik <jbacik@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	sct@...hat.com, adilger@...sterfs.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>,
	Satoshi OSHIMA <satoshi.oshima.fk@...achi.com>,
	sugita <yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] jbd: fix error handling for checkpoint io (rebased)

Hi,

Thank you for review.

Josef Bacik wrote:

> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:44:10PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> 
>>>> 
>>>>Index: linux-2.6.26-rc2/fs/ext3/super.c
>>>>===================================================================
>>>>--- linux-2.6.26-rc2.orig/fs/ext3/super.c
>>>>+++ linux-2.6.26-rc2/fs/ext3/super.c
>>>>@@ -395,7 +395,10 @@ static void ext3_put_super (struct super
>>>> 	ext3_xattr_put_super(sb);
>>>> 	journal_destroy(sbi->s_journal);
>>>> 	if (!(sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY)) {
>>>>-		EXT3_CLEAR_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sb, EXT3_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_RECOVER);
>>>>+		if (!is_checkpoint_aborted(sbi->s_journal)) {
>>>>+			EXT3_CLEAR_INCOMPAT_FEATURE(sb,
>>>>+				EXT3_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_RECOVER);
>>>>+		}
>>>> 		es->s_state = cpu_to_le16(sbi->s_mount_state);
>>>> 		BUFFER_TRACE(sbi->s_sbh, "marking dirty");
>>>> 		mark_buffer_dirty(sbi->s_sbh);
>>>
>>>Is this bit here really needed?  If we abort the journal the fs will be mounted
>>>read only and we should never get in here.  Is there a case where we could abort
>>>the journal and not be flipped to being read-only?  If there is such a case I
>>>would think that we should fix that by making the fs read-only, and not have
>>>this check.
>>
>>  Actually, journal_abort() (which could be called from journal_destroy())
>>does nothing to the filesystem as such. So at this moment, ext3 can still
>>happily think everything is OK. We only detect aborted journal in
>>ext3_journal_start_sb() and call ext3_abort() in that case, which does all
>>that is needed...

Yes, that is why I added this check.
 
 
> Hmm you're right, I was thinking we did some other stuff before put_super which
> would have caught a journal abort but it looks like thats not the case.  Still
> shouldn't do is_checkpoint_aborted(sbi->s_journal) since journal_destroy()
> kfree's the journal.  Should probably move the is_journal_aborted() check above
> that or something.  Thanks,

Good catch, I will fix it.
Thanks!

-- 
Hidehiro Kawai
Hitachi, Systems Development Laboratory
Linux Technology Center

--
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