linux-kernel - [10/59] ocfs2: Count more refcount records in file system fragmentation.

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: <20100824222523.266066196@clark.site>
Date:	Tue, 24 Aug 2010 15:24:22 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Cc:	stable-review@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	Tao Ma <tao.ma@...cle.com>,
	Joel Becker <joel.becker@...cle.com>
Subject: [10/59] ocfs2: Count more refcount records in file system fragmentation.

2.6.32-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Tao Ma <tao.ma@...cle.com>

commit 8a2e70c40ff58f82dde67770e6623ca45f0cb0c8 upstream.

The refcount record calculation in ocfs2_calc_refcount_meta_credits
is too optimistic that we can always allocate contiguous clusters
and handle an already existed refcount rec as a whole. Actually
because of file system fragmentation, we may have the chance to split
a refcount record into 3 parts during the transaction. So consider
the worst case in record calculation.

Signed-off-by: Tao Ma <tao.ma@...cle.com>
Signed-off-by: Joel Becker <joel.becker@...cle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>

---
 fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c |   20 +++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
+++ b/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
@@ -2454,16 +2454,26 @@ static int ocfs2_calc_refcount_meta_cred
 		len = min((u64)cpos + clusters, le64_to_cpu(rec.r_cpos) +
 			  le32_to_cpu(rec.r_clusters)) - cpos;
 		/*
-		 * If the refcount rec already exist, cool. We just need
-		 * to check whether there is a split. Otherwise we just need
-		 * to increase the refcount.
-		 * If we will insert one, increases recs_add.
-		 *
 		 * We record all the records which will be inserted to the
 		 * same refcount block, so that we can tell exactly whether
 		 * we need a new refcount block or not.
+		 *
+		 * If we will insert a new one, this is easy and only happens
+		 * during adding refcounted flag to the extent, so we don't
+		 * have a chance of spliting. We just need one record.
+		 *
+		 * If the refcount rec already exists, that would be a little
+		 * complicated. we may have to:
+		 * 1) split at the beginning if the start pos isn't aligned.
+		 *    we need 1 more record in this case.
+		 * 2) split int the end if the end pos isn't aligned.
+		 *    we need 1 more record in this case.
+		 * 3) split in the middle because of file system fragmentation.
+		 *    we need 2 more records in this case(we can't detect this
+		 *    beforehand, so always think of the worst case).
 		 */
 		if (rec.r_refcount) {
+			recs_add += 2;
 			/* Check whether we need a split at the beginning. */
 			if (cpos == start_cpos &&
 			    cpos != le64_to_cpu(rec.r_cpos))


--
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/