linux-kernel - Re: LVM snapshot broke between 4.14 and 4.16

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: <1ec0a220-d5b0-1c27-e63b-c4d3f4ce9d77@torlan.ru>
Date:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 00:39:22 +0300
From:   WGH <wgh@...lan.ru>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: LVM snapshot broke between 4.14 and 4.16

On 08/03/2018 12:32 AM, WGH wrote:
> On 08/02/2018 09:32 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> WGH (sorry, no idea what your real name is) - what's the source of the
>> script that broke? Was it some system script you got from outside and
>> likely to affect others too?
>>
>> Or was it just some local thing you wrote yourself and was
>> unintentionally buggy and nobody else is likely to hit this?
>>
>> Because if the latter, if you can work around it and you're the only
>> user this hits, we might just be able to ignore it.
> The script in question is written by me and contains literally two lines:
>
>     lvcreate --size 5G --snapshot --name snap0 --permission r
> /dev/mapper/vg0-lvol_rootfs
>     mount /dev/mapper/vg0-snap0 /mnt/rootfs_snapshot
>
> The script is not buggy (I think), it was written under simple
> assumption that --permission r works. And it does - unless you happen to
> have combination of kernel >=4.16 and lvm2 <2.02.178.
>
> The commit in question appeared only in 4.16, and this kernel version is
> not widespread yet. You have to be running both recent kernel and
> not-so-recent lvm2 to be bitten by this. This probably explains why no
> one else reported this problem.
>
> Workaround certainly exists: I can just create read-write snapshot, but
> mount it read-only. The reason why I didn't discover the workaround
> earlier is that after unsuccessful read-only snapshot creation system
> ends up in some weird state where read-write snapshots are also failing
> with the same error (until reboot). So I got a wrong impression that
> read-write snapshots were broken as well.
>
I've just found one public report of this bug, though:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=900442