linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next,v2] fuse: return the more nuanced writeback error on close()

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9dd14ee55bd023d59dc4d3621cb4042b502872ba.camel@hammerspace.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 May 2022 15:31:41 +0000
From:   Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>
To:     "miklos@...redi.hu" <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        "jlayton@...nel.org" <jlayton@...nel.org>
CC:     "chenxiaosong2@...wei.com" <chenxiaosong2@...wei.com>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "liuyongqiang13@...wei.com" <liuyongqiang13@...wei.com>,
        "zhangxiaoxu5@...wei.com" <zhangxiaoxu5@...wei.com>,
        "yi.zhang@...wei.com" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next,v2] fuse: return the more nuanced writeback error on
 close()

On Mon, 2022-05-30 at 14:13 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2022 at 03:35, ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong2@...wei.com>
> wrote:
> > 
> > As filemap_check_errors() only report -EIO or -ENOSPC, we return
> > more nuanced
> > writeback error -(file->f_mapping->wb_err & MAX_ERRNO).
> > 
> >   filemap_write_and_wait
> >     filemap_write_and_wait_range
> >       filemap_check_errors
> >         -ENOSPC or -EIO
> >   filemap_check_wb_err
> >     errseq_check
> >       return -(file->f_mapping->wb_err & MAX_ERRNO)
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong2@...wei.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/fuse/file.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/fuse/file.c b/fs/fuse/file.c
> > index f18d14d5fea1..9917bc2795e6 100644
> > --- a/fs/fuse/file.c
> > +++ b/fs/fuse/file.c
> > @@ -488,10 +488,10 @@ static int fuse_flush(struct file *file,
> > fl_owner_t id)
> >         inode_unlock(inode);
> > 
> >         err = filemap_check_errors(file->f_mapping);
> > +       /* return more nuanced writeback errors */
> >         if (err)
> > -               return err;
> > +               return filemap_check_wb_err(file->f_mapping, 0);
> 
> I'm wondering if this should be file_check_and_advance_wb_err()
> instead.
> 
> Is there a difference between ->flush() and ->fsync()?
> 
> Jeff, can you please help?
> 

Hi Miklos,

We just went through this discussion for the case of NFS.

The point is that ->flush() is only called on close(). While you can
report errors in close(), the 'man 2 fsync' manpage documents that
post-Linux 4.13, the writeback errors are required to be returned on -
>fsync(). You should therefore not be calling
file_check_and_advance_wb_err() in anything that is being called as
part of close() since that will clear the error from the errseq_t and
prevent it from being reported in a future fsync() call from a dup()ed
file descriptor, etc.

NFS also wants to make a special case out of write() when we know that
the error is one of EDQUOT, EFBIG or ENOSPC, in which case we will also
use  file_check_and_advance_wb_err() to return the error immediately,
and clear it from the errseq_t.

-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trond.myklebust@...merspace.com