linux-ext4 - Re: fsx-linux loosing mmap() writes under memory pressure

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: <20090304175031.GA24730@duck.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 4 Mar 2009 18:50:31 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fsx-linux loosing mmap() writes under memory pressure

On Wed 04-03-09 16:55:35, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 04-03-09 15:51:09, Jan Kara wrote:
> >   first, I'd like to point out that this has happened under UML so it can
> > be just some obscure bug in that architecture but I belive it's worth
> > debugging anyway. Now to the problem:
> >   This has happened with today Linus's git snapshot. The filesystem is ext3
> > with *1KB* blocksize. I booted UML with 64MB of memory and run (these are
> > test's from Andrew Morton's torture tests):
> >   fsx-linux -l 8000000 /mnt/testfile
> >   bash-shared-mapping -t 8 /mnt/bashfile 50000000
> > (the second test just makes the UML under memory pressure and stresses the
> > filesystem, otherwise it does not interact with fsx-linux in any way).
> >   After some time (like an hour) fsx-linux reported the file is corrupted. I
> > tried again and it happened again so probably some debugging should be
> > possible.
> >   Both times it seems we've simply completely lost a write which happened
> > through mmap (2 pages in the first case, 3 pages in the second case). Also
> > I've checked and in the first case no blocks are allocated for the offsets
> > where the data should be so most probably we've lost the write before
> > block_write_full_page() called get_block().
> >   I'll debug this further but I wanted let people know there's some problem
> > and maybe somebody has some bright idea :).  I'm attaching the log from fsx
> > if someone is interested. 
>   Testing a bit more, I managed to reproduce the problem on ext2 and what's
> more strange, now the lost page was written via ordinary write() (fsxlog
> attached). So I believe this is more likely to be UML specific...
  And to add even more information, this also happens on ext2 with 4KB
blocksize (although much more rarely it seems). Again the data was written
by an extending write() but the block for it was not even allocated...

									Honza
--
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