linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] f2fs: avoid GC causing encrypted file corrupted

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: <8f0e5fc7-cb22-47a0-30e8-4e3a25891e8b@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Sep 2018 10:37:12 +0800
From:   Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@...wei.com>
To:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
CC:     <chao@...nel.org>, <yuchao0@...wei.com>, <yunlong.song@...oud.com>,
        <miaoxie@...wei.com>, <bintian.wang@...wei.com>,
        <shengyong1@...wei.com>, <heyunlei@...wei.com>,
        <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: avoid GC causing encrypted file corrupted



On 2018/9/19 2:17, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 09/18, Yunlong Song wrote:
>> The encrypted file may be corrupted by GC in following case:
>>
>> Time 1: | segment 1 blkaddr = A |  GC -> | segment 2 blkaddr = B |
>> Encrypted block 1 is moved from blkaddr A of segment 1 to blkaddr B of
>> segment 2,
>>
>> Time 2: | segment 1 blkaddr = B |  GC -> | segment 3 blkaddr = C |
>              segment 2 blkaddr = B?
Sorry for typing error.
Yes.
>
>> Before page 1 is written back and if segment 2 become a victim, then
>> page 1 is moved from blkaddr B of segment 2 to blkaddr Cof segment 3,
>                                                           C of ?
Yes.
>
>> during the GC process of Time 2, f2fs should wait for page 1 written back
>> before reading it, or move_data_block will read a garbage block from
>> blkaddr B since page is not written back to blkaddr B yet.
> move_data_block() checks PageUptodate() so it won't get garbage, yes?
> So, does ra_data_block need to check PageUptodate?
You mean if page 1 is read from blkaddr B before it is written back to 
blkaddr B, then
the page will become non-uptodate status, why? Is it because 
__read_end_io checks
"(bio->bi_status || PageError(page))" and ClearPageUptodate(page)?

>
>> Commit 6aa58d8a ("f2fs: readahead encrypted block during GC") introduce
>> ra_data_block to read encrypted block, but it forgets to add
>> f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback to avoid racing between GC and flush.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>   fs/f2fs/gc.c | 10 ++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>> index a4c1a41..c55fb62 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>> @@ -641,6 +641,14 @@ static int ra_data_block(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index)
>>   	fio.page = page;
>>   	fio.new_blkaddr = fio.old_blkaddr = dn.data_blkaddr;
>>   
>> +	/*
>> +	 * don't cache encrypted data into meta inode until previous dirty
>> +	 * data were writebacked to avoid racing between GC and flush.
>> +	 */
>> +	f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, DATA, true);
>> +
>> +	f2fs_wait_on_block_writeback(inode, dn.data_blkaddr);
>> +
>>   	fio.encrypted_page = f2fs_pagecache_get_page(META_MAPPING(sbi),
>>   					dn.data_blkaddr,
>>   					FGP_LOCK | FGP_CREAT, GFP_NOFS);
>> @@ -723,6 +731,8 @@ static void move_data_block(struct inode *inode, block_t bidx,
>>   	 */
>>   	f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, DATA, true);
>>   
>> +	f2fs_wait_on_block_writeback(inode, dn.data_blkaddr);
>> +
>>   	err = f2fs_get_node_info(fio.sbi, dn.nid, &ni);
>>   	if (err)
>>   		goto put_out;
>> -- 
>> 1.8.5.2
> .
>

-- 
Thanks,
Yunlong Song