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: <20130313210216.GA7754@quack.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 13 Mar 2013 22:02:16 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Shuge <shugelinux@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Kevin <kevin@...winneretch.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bounce:fix bug, avoid to flush dcache on slab page
 from jbd2.

On Wed 13-03-13 12:44:29, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 09:50:21AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 12-03-13 18:10:20, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:32:21PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:37:36 +0800 Shuge <shugelinux@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > The bounce accept slab pages from jbd2, and flush dcache on them.
> > > > > When enabling VM_DEBUG, it will tigger VM_BUG_ON in page_mapping().
> > > > > So, check PageSlab to avoid it in __blk_queue_bounce().
> > > > > 
> > > > > Bug URL: http://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/7/56
> > > > > 
> > > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > --- a/mm/bounce.c
> > > > > +++ b/mm/bounce.c
> > > > > @@ -214,7 +214,8 @@ static void __blk_queue_bounce(struct request_queue 
> > > > > *q, struct bio **bio_orig,
> > > > >   		if (rw == WRITE) {
> > > > >   			char *vto, *vfrom;
> > > > >   -			flush_dcache_page(from->bv_page);
> > > > > +			if (unlikely(!PageSlab(from->bv_page)))
> > > > > +				flush_dcache_page(from->bv_page);
> > > > >   			vto = page_address(to->bv_page) + to->bv_offset;
> > > > >   			vfrom = kmap(from->bv_page) + from->bv_offset;
> > > > >   			memcpy(vto, vfrom, to->bv_len);
> > > > 
> > > > I guess this is triggered by Catalin's f1a0c4aa0937975b ("arm64: Cache
> > > > maintenance routines"), which added a page_mapping() call to arm64's
> > > > arch/arm64/mm/flush.c:flush_dcache_page().
> > > > 
> > > > What's happening is that jbd2 is using kmalloc() to allocate buffer_head
> > > > data.  That gets submitted down the BIO layer and __blk_queue_bounce()
> > > > calls flush_dcache_page() which in the arm64 case calls page_mapping()
> > > > and page_mapping() does VM_BUG_ON(PageSlab) and splat.
> > > > 
> > > > The unusual thing about all of this is that the payload for some disk
> > > > IO is coming from kmalloc, rather than being a user page.  It's oddball
> > > > but we've done this for ages and should continue to support it.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Now, the page from kmalloc() cannot be in highmem, so why did the
> > > > bounce code decide to bounce it?
> > > > 
> > > > __blk_queue_bounce() does
> > > > 
> > > > 		/*
> > > > 		 * is destination page below bounce pfn?
> > > > 		 */
> > > > 		if (page_to_pfn(page) <= queue_bounce_pfn(q) && !force)
> > > > 			continue;
> > > > 
> > > > and `force' comes from must_snapshot_stable_pages().  But
> > > > must_snapshot_stable_pages() must have returned false, because if it
> > > > had returned true then it would have been must_snapshot_stable_pages()
> > > > which went BUG, because must_snapshot_stable_pages() calls page_mapping().
> > > > 
> > > > So my tentative diagosis is that arm64 is fishy.  A page which was
> > > > allocated via jbd2_alloc(GFP_NOFS)->kmem_cache_alloc() ended up being
> > > > above arm64's queue_bounce_pfn().  Can you please do a bit of
> > > > investigation to work out if this is what is happening?  Find out why
> > > > __blk_queue_bounce() decided to bounce a page which shouldn't have been
> > > > bounced?
> > > 
> > > That sure is strange.  I didn't see any obvious reasons why we'd end up with a
> > > kmalloc above queue_bounce_pfn().  But then I don't have any arm64s either.
> > > 
> > > > This is all terribly fragile :( afaict if someone sets
> > > > bdi_cap_stable_pages_required() against that jbd2 queue, we're going to
> > > > hit that BUG_ON() again, via must_snapshot_stable_pages()'s
> > > > page_mapping() call.  (Darrick, this means you ;))
> > > 
> > > Wheeee.  You're right, we shouldn't be calling page_mapping on slab pages.
> > > We can keep walking the bio segments to find a non-slab page that can tell us
> > > MS_SNAP_STABLE is set, since we probably won't need the bounce buffer anyway.
> > > 
> > > How does something like this look?  (+ the patch above)
> >   Umm, this won't quite work. We can have a bio which has just PageSlab
> > page attached and so you won't be able to get to the superblock. Heh, isn't
> > the whole page_mapping() thing in must_snapshot_stable_pages() wrong? When we
> > do direct IO, these pages come directly from userspace and hell knows where
> > they come from. Definitely their page_mapping() doesn't give us anything
> > useful... Sorry for not realizing this earlier when reviewing the patch.
> > 
> > ... remembering why we need to get to sb and why ext3 needs this ... So
> > maybe a better solution would be to have a bio flag meaning that pages need
> > bouncing? And we would set it from filesystems that need it - in case of
> > ext3 only writeback of data from kjournald actually needs to bounce the
> > pages. Thoughts?
> 
> What about dirty pages that don't result in journal transactions?  I think
> ext3_sync_file() eventually calls ext3_ordered_writepage, which then calls
> __block_write_full_page, which in turn calls submit_bh().
  So here we have two options:
Either we let ext3 wait the same way as other filesystems when stable pages
are required. Then only data IO from kjournald needs to be bounced (all
other IO is properly protected by PageWriteback bit).

Or we won't let ext3 wait (as it is now), keep the superblock flag that fs
needs bouncing, and set the bio flag in __block_write_full_page() and
kjournald based on the sb flag.

I think the first option is slightly better but I don't feel strongly
about that.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ