linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 3/4] jbd: abort when failed to log metadata buffers (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: <48337BDD.60705@hitachi.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 May 2008 10:33:17 +0900
From:	Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, sct@...hat.com,
	adilger@...sterfs.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...hat.com>,
	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>,
	Satoshi OSHIMA <satoshi.oshima.fk@...achi.com>,
	sugita <yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] jbd: abort when failed to log metadata
    buffers	(rebased)

Hi,

Jan Kara wrote:
> 
> On Fri 16-05-08 19:26:57, Hidehiro Kawai wrote:
> 
>>Jan Kara wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed 14-05-08 13:49:51, Hidehiro Kawai wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Subject: [PATCH 3/4] jbd: abort when failed to log metadata buffers
>>>>
>>>>If we failed to write metadata buffers to the journal space and
>>>>succeeded to write the commit record, stale data can be written
>>>>back to the filesystem as metadata in the recovery phase.
>>>>
>>>>To avoid this, when we failed to write out metadata buffers,
>>>>abort the journal before writing the commit record.
>>>>
>>>>Signed-off-by: Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>
>>>>---
>>>>fs/jbd/commit.c |    3 +++
>>>>1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>>Index: linux-2.6.26-rc2/fs/jbd/commit.c
>>>>===================================================================
>>>>--- linux-2.6.26-rc2.orig/fs/jbd/commit.c
>>>>+++ linux-2.6.26-rc2/fs/jbd/commit.c
>>>>@@ -703,6 +703,9 @@ wait_for_iobuf:
>>>>		__brelse(bh);
>>>>	}
>>>>
>>>>+	if (err)
>>>>+		journal_abort(journal, err);
>>>>+
>>>>	J_ASSERT (commit_transaction->t_shadow_list == NULL);
>>>
>>>  Shouldn't this rather be further just before
>>>journal_write_commit_record()? We should abort also if writing revoke
>>>records etc. failed, shouldn't we?
>>
>>Unlike metadata blocks, each revoke block has a descriptor with the
>>sequence number of the commiting transaction.  If we failed to write
>>a revoke block, there should be an old control block, metadata block,
>>or zero-filled block where we tried to write the revoke block.
>>In the recovery process, this old invalid block is detected by
>>checking its magic number and sequence number, then the transaction
>>is ignored even if we have succeeded to write the commit record.
>>So I think we don't need to check for errors just after writing
>>revoke records.
> 
>   Yes, I agree that not doing such check will not cause data corruption but
> still I think that in case we fail to properly commit a transaction, we
> should detect the error and abort the journal...

I see.  I'll move the aborting point to just before
journal_write_commit_record() in the next version.

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