[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210406140504.GE19407@quack2.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:05:04 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@...il.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, tytso@....edu, jack@...e.com,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: KCSAN: data-race in __jbd2_journal_file_buffer /
jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata
On Tue 06-04-21 21:27:48, Hao Sun wrote:
> > Thanks for report but I'm not sure what KCSAN is complaining about - isn't the report truncated?
>
> Yes, the full KCSAN report is available in the attached log file.
Sorry, I missed that in your original email.
> Here is the report :
> ==================================================================
> BUG: KCSAN: data-race in __jbd2_journal_file_buffer /
> jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata
>
> write to 0xffff88800af6da38 of 8 bytes by task 4822 on cpu 1:
> __jbd2_journal_file_buffer+0x18d/0x370
> __jbd2_journal_refile_buffer+0x155/0x230
> jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x24c6/0x3200
> kjournald2+0x253/0x470
> kthread+0x1f0/0x220
> ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>
> read to 0xffff88800af6da38 of 8 bytes by task 1955 on cpu 0:
> jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata+0x17f/0x670
> __ext4_handle_dirty_metadata+0xc6/0x590
> ext4_mark_iloc_dirty+0x12dd/0x16e0
> __ext4_mark_inode_dirty+0x4d2/0x5d0
> ext4_writepages+0x1262/0x1e50
> do_writepages+0x7b/0x150
> __writeback_single_inode+0x84/0x4e0
> writeback_sb_inodes+0x69f/0x1020
> __writeback_inodes_wb+0xb0/0x2a0
> wb_writeback+0x290/0x650
> wb_do_writeback+0x582/0x5d0
> wb_workfn+0xb8/0x410
> process_one_work+0x3e1/0x940
> worker_thread+0x64a/0xaa0
> kthread+0x1f0/0x220
> ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>
> Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> CPU: 0 PID: 1955 Comm: kworker/u5:2 Not tainted 5.11.0+ #5
>
>
> Sorry, I couldn't symbolize it because the original Linux binary was lost.
> Do you think this is an actual bug?
So it is difficult to be 100% sure without knowing which particular access
caused the KCSAN warning but I'm quite confident it was caused by one of
unlocked accesses to jh->b_transaction in jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata().
And as the comments explain, these are only assertions which we redo under
proper lock if they look like they would fail. So the code is in fact
correct.
Honza
> Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> 于2021年4月6日周二 下午8:32写道:
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > On Sun 04-04-21 17:40:44, Hao Sun wrote:
> > > When using Healer(https://github.com/SunHao-0/healer/tree/dev) to fuzz
> > > the Linux kernel, I found a data-race vulnerability in
> > > __jbd2_journal_file_buffer / jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata.
> > > Sorry, data-race is usually difficult to reproduce. I cannot provide
> > > you with a reproducing program.
> > > I hope that the call stack information in the crash log can help you
> > > locate the problem.
> > > Kernel config and full log can be found in the attachment.
> > >
> > > Here is the detailed information:
> > > commit: 3b9cdafb5358eb9f3790de2f728f765fef100731
> > > version: linux 5.11
> > > git tree: upstream
> > > report:
> > > ==================================================================
> > > BUG: KCSAN: data-race in __jbd2_journal_file_buffer /
> > > jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata
> > > write to 0xffff88800af6da38 of 8 bytes by task 4822 on cpu 1:
> > > __jbd2_journal_file_buffer+0x18d/0x370 linux/fs/jbd2/transaction.c:2518
> > > __jbd2_journal_refile_buffer+0x155/0x230 linux/fs/jbd2/transaction.c:2612
> > > jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x24c6/0x3200 linux/fs/jbd2/commit.c:1084
> > > kjournald2+0x253/0x470 linux/fs/jbd2/journal.c:213
> > > kthread+0x1f0/0x220 linux/kernel/kthread.c:292
> > > ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 linux/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:294
> >
> > Thanks for report but I'm not sure what KCSAN is complaining about - isn't
> > the report truncated? I'm missing 'read' part of the report... The complaint
> > is on line:
> >
> > jh->b_transaction = transaction;
> >
> > I would guess the complaint is because of the check:
> >
> > /*
> > * This and the following assertions are unreliable since we may see jh
> > * in inconsistent state unless we grab bh_state lock. But this is
> > * crucial to catch bugs so let's do a reliable check until the
> > * lockless handling is fully proven.
> > */
> > if (jh->b_transaction != transaction &&
> > jh->b_next_transaction != transaction) {
> >
> > And the comment explains, why we do this unreliable check. Again, if we
> > wanted to silence KCSAN, we could use data_race() macro but AFAIU Ted isn't
> > very fond of that annotation.
> >
> > Honza
> >
> > --
> > Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
> > SUSE Labs, CR
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists