linux-kernel - Re: Kernel 2.6.30.4 loop(..?) regression (& with/2.6.31-rc6)

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908280720220.30806@p34.internal.lan>
Date:	Fri, 28 Aug 2009 07:23:11 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc:	Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6.30.4 loop(..?) regression (& with/2.6.31-rc6)



On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 05:19:11PM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>> For the root filesystem, on / type xfs (rw,noatime)
>>> For larger partitions (per the cryptoloop doc) the partition itself is
>>> setup via cryptoloop and then XFS ontop of that.  Nothing special.
>> 
>> Just to make sure we have all data here - you see the problem only
>> with loop devices backed by XFS, only with loop devices backed by
>> raw partitions or with both?
> Both.
>
>> 
>>>> Any way to trgiger it with just loop but not crypto, etc.
>>> Unfortunately not that I am aware of..  Would trying the kernel with the
>>> patch removed and mounted with -o nobarrier help to show us anything, or?
>> 
>> Actually, yes - seeing what happens if you run plain 2.6.30 or 2.6.31-rc
>> without the backout patch, but with -o nobarrier would be very
>> interesting.
>> 
> Will give it a try with 2.6.31-rc6 and mount all loop devices (both those 
> backed by XFS and raw partitions) with -o nobarrier to see if the problem 
> recurs.  So far though with that patch up until this next test, there were no 
> problems.
>
> Justin.
>
>

Hi,

So far:

$ uptime
  07:20:04 up 1 day, 13:49,  1 user,  load average: 0.07, 0.02, 0.06

Let's give it another 48-72 hours with -o nobarrier, so far, it has not 
recurred.

It still may happen; however, moving forward I was wondering..

If both '-o nobarrier' and the patch solves the issue, what is the next 
action that should be taken?  Update the documentation to always use
-o nobarrier for cryptoloop? Or get the patch reverted in mainline?

Justin.
--
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/