linux-ext4 - Re: Re: Re: EXT4 panic at jbd2_journal_put_journal

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <12945098.35291368438804981.JavaMail.weblogic@epv6ml07>
Date:	Mon, 13 May 2013 09:53:27 +0000 (GMT)
From:	EUNBONG SONG <eunb.song@...sung.com>
To:	Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
Cc:	Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: EXT4 panic at jbd2_journal_put_journal_head() in 3.9+



> Hi all,

> First of all I couldn't reproduce this regression in my sand box.  So
> the following speculation is only my guess.  I suspect that the commit
> (ae4647fb) isn't root cause.  It just uncover a potential bug that has
> been there for a long time.  I look at the code, and found two
> suspicious stuff in jbd2.  The first one is in do_get_write_access().
> In this function we forgot to lock bh state when we check b_jlist ==
> BJ_Shadow.  I generate a patch to fix it, and I really think it is the
> root cause.  Further, in __journal_remove_journal_head() we check
> b_jlist == BJ_None.  But, when this function is called, bh state won't
> be locked sometimes.  So I suspect this is why we hit a BUG in
> jbd2_journal_put_journal_head().  But I don't have a good solution to
> fix this until now because I don't know whether we need to lock bh state
> here, or maybe we should remove this assertation.
>
> So, generally, Tony, Eunbong, could you please try the following patch?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>                                                 - Zheng


Hi, I tested your patch. Unfortunately, the same problem was reproduced.
Thanks.