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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1362579435-6333-1-git-send-email-wenqing.lz@taobao.com> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 22:17:10 +0800 From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com> To: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Cc: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org> Subject: [PATCH v2 0/5] ext4: try to fix up es regressions Hi all, The patch series tries to fixup some regressions after applied the extent status tree. These patches have rebased against the latest dev branch of ext4 and have been tested by xfstests. After rebased the latest dev branch, two patches have been dropped because they have been applied into the branch. A new patch is added, which tries to fix up a wrong return value in ext4_split_extent(). Otherwise, there are two major changes in this version. The first one is to improve the self-testing-infrastructure according to Dmitry's comment. The second one is to improve the zero out code. After applied this patch series, I havn't seen the warning messages from self-testing infrastructure except the following cases. - xfstests #13 with bigalloc or with no journal - xfstests #223 with dioread_nolock The reason is that when we lookup a block mapping from status tree i_data_sem locking won't be taken. So there is a race window that an unwritten extent could be converted by end_io when we compare the result between extent tree and status tree. Dmitry, Ted, could you please confirm that this patch series can fix the defrag regression? Thank you so much. Until now I run #300 and #301 a lot times but I failed to hit this regression. :-( *Big Note* When I am testing this patch series, I found some regressions in dev branch. Here is a note. These regressions could be hitted by running test case serveral times. So If we just run xfstests one time, they could be missed. - xfstests #74 with data=journal - xfstests #83 with bigalloc Some threads could be blocked for 120s. - xfstests #247 with data=journal Some warning messages are printed by ext4_releasepage. We hit WARN_ON(PageChecked(page)) in this function. But the test case itself can pass. - xfstests #269 with dioread_nolock The system will hang I don't paste full details here to make description clearly. I will go on tracing these problems. I am happy to provide full details if some one want to take a close look at these problems. v2 <- v1: * Improve self-testing infrastructure * Improve zero out code * Fix a wrong return value in ext4_split_extent v1: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.ext4/37338 Thanks, - Zheng Dmitry Monakhov (1): ext4: add self-testing infrastructure to do a sanity check Zheng Liu (4): ext4: improve ext4_es_can_be_merged() to avoid a potential overflow ext4: fix wrong m_len value after unwritten extent conversion ext4: update extent status tree after an extent is zeroed out ext4: fix wrong the number of the allocted blocks in ext4_split_extent fs/ext4/extents.c | 45 ++++++++-- fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 212 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- fs/ext4/extents_status.h | 9 ++ fs/ext4/inode.c | 106 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 362 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) -- 1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists