linux-kernel - Re: 3.0-rcX BUG at fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:432

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: <4DF2627F.4030600@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:29:19 -0400
From:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
To:	Sage Weil <sage@...dream.net>
CC:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Jim Schutt <jaschut@...dia.gov>, dave <dave@...os.cz>,
	miaox <miaox@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 3.0-rcX BUG at fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:432 - bisected

On 06/10/2011 02:14 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Sage Weil wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Chris Mason wrote:
>>> Excerpts from Jim Schutt's message of 2011-06-10 13:06:22 -0400:
>>>
>>> [ two different btrfs crashes ]
>>>
>>> I think your two crashes in btrfs were from the uninit variables and
>>> those should be fixed in rc2.
>>>
>>>> When I did my bisection, my criteria for success/failure was
>>>> "did mkcephfs succeed?".  When I apply this criteria to a recent
>>>> linus kernel (e.g. 06e86849cf4019), which includes the fix you
>>>> mentioned (aa0467d8d2a00e), I get still a different failure mode,
>>>> which doesn't actually reference btrfs:
>>>>
>>>> [  276.364178] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 000000000000000a
>>>> [  276.365127] IP: [<ffffffffa05434b1>] journal_start+0x3e/0x9c [jbd]
>>>
>>> Looking at the resulting code in the oops, we're here in journal_start:
>>>
>>>         if (handle) {
>>>                 J_ASSERT(handle->h_transaction->t_journal == journal);
>>>
>>> handle comes from current->journal_info, and we're doing a deref on
>>> handle->h_transaction, which is probably 0xa.
>>>
>>> So, we're leaving crud in current->journal_info and ext3 is finding it.
>>>
>>> Perhaps its from ceph starting a transaction but leaving it running?
>>> The bug came with Josef's transaction performance fixes, but it is
>>> probably a mixture of his code with the ioctls ceph is using.
>>
>> Ah, yeah, that's the problem.  We saw a similar problem a while back with 
>> the start/stop transaction ioctls.  In this case, create_snapshot is doing
>>
>> 	trans = btrfs_start_transaction(root->fs_info->extent_root, 5);
>> 	if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
>> 		ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
>> 		goto fail;
>> 	}
>>
>> which sets current->journal_info.  Then
>>
>> 	ret = btrfs_snap_reserve_metadata(trans, pending_snapshot);
>> 	BUG_ON(ret);
>>
>> 	list_add(&pending_snapshot->list,
>> 		 &trans->transaction->pending_snapshots);
>> 	if (async_transid) {
>> 		*async_transid = trans->transid;
>> 		ret = btrfs_commit_transaction_async(trans,
>> 				     root->fs_info->extent_root, 1);
>> 	} else {
>> 		ret = btrfs_commit_transaction(trans,
>> 				       root->fs_info->extent_root);
>> 	}
>>
>> but the async snap creation ioctl takes the async path, which runs 
>> btrfs_commit_transaction in a worker thread.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the right thing to do is here is... can whatever is in 
>> journal_info be attached to trans instead in 
>> btrfs_commit_transaction_async()?
> 
> It looks like it's not used for anything in btrfs, actually; it's just set 
> and cleared.  What's the point of that?
> 

It is used now, check the beginning of start_transaction().  Thanks,

Josef
--
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/