linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Allow SysRq emergency sync to thaw frozen filesystems

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]

Date:	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:20:31 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	t-sato@...jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow SysRq emergency sync to thaw frozen filesystems

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:06:17 -0600
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com> wrote:

> Now that the filesystem freeze operation has been elevated
> to the VFS, and is just an ioctl away, some sort of safety net
> for unintentionally frozen root filesystems may be in order.
> 
> The timeout thaw originally proposed did not get merged, but
> perhaps something like this would be useful in emergencies.
> 
> This doesn't have to piggyback on the existing emergency sync
> sysrq, but it seems like a reasonable, simple addition to me.
> 
> I've tested this on a non-root fs with multiple (nested) freezers,
> as well as on a system rendered unresponsive due to a frozen
> root fs.

Worried.

Under what operational scenarios is ths feature actually needed/used?

> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
> ---
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/char/sysrq.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/char/sysrq.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/char/sysrq.c
> @@ -151,6 +151,7 @@ static struct sysrq_key_op sysrq_reboot_
>  
>  static void sysrq_handle_sync(int key, struct tty_struct *tty)
>  {
> +	emergency_thaw();
>  	emergency_sync();
>  }

Kind of weird.   The thaw will happen after/during the sync().

I guess that if the sync is blocked on a frozen fs then things will
sort themselves out.

otoh, if all the pdflush threads are blocked on frozen filesystems
(possible?) then the emergency_thaw() simply won't do anything.

> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/buffer.c
> +++ linux-2.6/fs/buffer.c
> @@ -258,6 +258,29 @@ struct super_block *freeze_bdev(struct b
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(freeze_bdev);
>  
> +void do_thaw(unsigned long unused)
> +{
> +	struct super_block *sb;
> +	char b[BDEVNAME_SIZE];
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(sb, &super_blocks, s_list) {
> +		while (sb->s_bdev && !thaw_bdev(sb->s_bdev, sb))
> +			printk(KERN_WARNING "Emergency Thaw on %s\n",
> +			       bdevname(sb->s_bdev, b));

hm, I made the args to bdevname() backwards.  Bad me.

> +	}
> +	printk(KERN_WARNING "Emergency Thaw complete\n");
> +}

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/