| 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: <20230323114407.xenntblzv4ewfqkk@quack3>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 12:44:07 +0100
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu,
adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, jack@...e.cz, ritesh.list@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
yangerkun@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ext4: fix race between writepages and remount
On Thu 16-03-23 19:28:32, Baokun Li wrote:
> We got a WARNING in ext4_add_complete_io:
> ==================================================================
> WARNING: at fs/ext4/page-io.c:231 ext4_put_io_end_defer+0x182/0x250
> CPU: 10 PID: 77 Comm: ksoftirqd/10 Tainted: 6.3.0-rc2 #85
> RIP: 0010:ext4_put_io_end_defer+0x182/0x250 [ext4]
> [...]
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> ext4_end_bio+0xa8/0x240 [ext4]
> bio_endio+0x195/0x310
> blk_update_request+0x184/0x770
> scsi_end_request+0x2f/0x240
> scsi_io_completion+0x75/0x450
> scsi_finish_command+0xef/0x160
> scsi_complete+0xa3/0x180
> blk_complete_reqs+0x60/0x80
> blk_done_softirq+0x25/0x40
> __do_softirq+0x119/0x4c8
> run_ksoftirqd+0x42/0x70
> smpboot_thread_fn+0x136/0x3c0
> kthread+0x140/0x1a0
> ret_from_fork+0x2c/0x50
> ==================================================================
>
> Above issue may happen as follows:
> cpu1 cpu2
> ______________________________|_____________________________
> mount -o dioread_lock
> ext4_writepages
> ext4_do_writepages
> *if (ext4_should_dioread_nolock(inode))*
> // rsv_blocks is not assigned here
> mount -o remount,dioread_nolock
> ext4_journal_start_with_reserve
> __ext4_journal_start
> __ext4_journal_start_sb
> jbd2__journal_start
> *if (rsv_blocks)*
> // h_rsv_handle is not initialized here
> mpage_map_and_submit_extent
> mpage_map_one_extent
> dioread_nolock = ext4_should_dioread_nolock(inode)
> if (dioread_nolock && (map->m_flags & EXT4_MAP_UNWRITTEN))
> mpd->io_submit.io_end->handle = handle->h_rsv_handle
> ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag
> io_end->flag |= EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN
> // now io_end->handle is NULL but has EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN flag
>
> scsi_finish_command
> scsi_io_completion
> scsi_io_completion_action
> scsi_end_request
> blk_update_request
> req_bio_endio
> bio_endio
> bio->bi_end_io > ext4_end_bio
> ext4_put_io_end_defer
> ext4_add_complete_io
> // trigger WARN_ON(!io_end->handle && sbi->s_journal);
>
> The immediate cause of this problem is that ext4_should_dioread_nolock()
> function returns inconsistent values in the ext4_do_writepages() and
> mpage_map_one_extent(). There are four conditions in this function that
> can be changed at mount time to cause this problem. These four conditions
> can be divided into two categories:
> (1) journal_data and EXT4_EXTENTS_FL, which can be changed by ioctl
> (2) DELALLOC and DIOREAD_NOLOCK, which can be changed by remount
> The two in the first category have been fixed by commit c8585c6fcaf2
> ("ext4: fix races between changing inode journal mode and ext4_writepages")
> and commit cb85f4d23f79 ("ext4: fix race between writepages and enabling
> EXT4_EXTENTS_FL") respectively.
> Two cases in the other category have not yet been fixed, and the above
> issue is caused by this situation. We refer to the fix for the first
> category, When DELALLOC or DIOREAD_NOLOCK is detected to be changed
> during remount, we hold the s_writepages_rwsem lock to avoid racing with
> ext4_writepages to trigger the problem.
> Moreover, we add an EXT4_MOUNT_SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK macro to ensure that
> the mount options used by ext4_should_dioread_nolock() and __ext4_remount()
> are always consistent.
>
> Fixes: 6b523df4fb5a ("ext4: use transaction reservation for extent conversion in ext4_end_io")
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
Nice catch! One comment below:
> ---
> fs/ext4/ext4.h | 3 ++-
> fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h | 9 +++++----
> fs/ext4/super.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> index 08b29c289da4..f60967fa648f 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h
> @@ -1703,7 +1703,8 @@ struct ext4_sb_info {
>
> /*
> * Barrier between writepages ops and changing any inode's JOURNAL_DATA
> - * or EXTENTS flag.
> + * or EXTENTS flag or between changing SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK flag on
> + * remount and writepages ops.
> */
> struct percpu_rw_semaphore s_writepages_rwsem;
> struct dax_device *s_daxdev;
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> index 0c77697d5e90..d82bfcdd56e5 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> @@ -488,6 +488,9 @@ static inline int ext4_free_data_revoke_credits(struct inode *inode, int blocks)
> return blocks + 2*(EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_cluster_ratio - 1);
> }
>
> +/* delalloc is a temporary fix to prevent generic/422 test failures*/
> +#define EXT4_MOUNT_SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK (EXT4_MOUNT_DIOREAD_NOLOCK | \
> + EXT4_MOUNT_DELALLOC)
> /*
> * This function controls whether or not we should try to go down the
> * dioread_nolock code paths, which makes it safe to avoid taking
> @@ -499,7 +502,8 @@ static inline int ext4_free_data_revoke_credits(struct inode *inode, int blocks)
> */
> static inline int ext4_should_dioread_nolock(struct inode *inode)
> {
> - if (!test_opt(inode->i_sb, DIOREAD_NOLOCK))
> + if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK) !=
> + EXT4_MOUNT_SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK)
> return 0;
> if (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode))
> return 0;
> @@ -507,9 +511,6 @@ static inline int ext4_should_dioread_nolock(struct inode *inode)
> return 0;
> if (ext4_should_journal_data(inode))
> return 0;
> - /* temporary fix to prevent generic/422 test failures */
> - if (!test_opt(inode->i_sb, DELALLOC))
> - return 0;
> return 1;
> }
Is there a need for this SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK? When called from writeback
we will be protected by s_writepages_rwsem anyway. When called from other
places, we either decide to do dioread_nolock or don't but the situation
can change at any instant so I don't see how unifying this check would
help. And the new SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK somewhat obfuscates what's going
on.
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c
> index fefcd42f34ea..bdf6b288aeff 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
> @@ -6403,8 +6403,22 @@ static int __ext4_remount(struct fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>
> }
>
> + /* Get the flag we really need to set/clear. */
> + ctx->mask_s_mount_opt &= sbi->s_mount_opt;
> + ctx->vals_s_mount_opt &= ~sbi->s_mount_opt;
> +
> + /*
> + * If EXT4_MOUNT_SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK change on remount, we need
> + * to hold s_writepages_rwsem to avoid racing with writepages ops.
> + */
> + if (ctx_changed_mount_opt(ctx, EXT4_MOUNT_SHOULD_DIOREAD_NOLOCK))
> + percpu_down_write(&sbi->s_writepages_rwsem);
> +
Honestly, I'd be inclined to grab s_writepages_rwsem unconditionally during
remount. Remount is not a fast path operation and waiting for writepages
isn't too bad. Also it's easier for testing :).
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists