linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/page-writeback: Consolidate wb_thresh bumping logic into __wb_calc

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: <pir6qmj2la57tvjkan5wbhjnji6tw27w45axseqcgfx4zzvz44@3mthcpyjomgw>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:28:45 +0100
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Jim Zhao <jimzhao.ai@...il.com>, 
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, willy@...radead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page-writeback: Consolidate wb_thresh bumping logic
 into __wb_calc_thresh

On Wed 15-01-25 17:07:36, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 14-01-25 07:01:08, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 1/14/25 05:19, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Mon 13-01-25 15:05:25, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 06:05:39PM +0800, Jim Zhao wrote:
> > > > > Address the feedback from "mm/page-writeback: raise wb_thresh to prevent
> > > > > write blocking with strictlimit"(39ac99852fca98ca44d52716d792dfaf24981f53).
> > > > > The wb_thresh bumping logic is scattered across wb_position_ratio,
> > > > > __wb_calc_thresh, and wb_update_dirty_ratelimit. For consistency,
> > > > > consolidate all wb_thresh bumping logic into __wb_calc_thresh.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jim Zhao <jimzhao.ai@...il.com>
> > > > 
> > > > This patch triggers a boot failure with one of my 'sheb' boot tests.
> > > > It is seen when trying to boot from flash (mtd). The log says
> > > > 
> > > > ...
> > > > Starting network: 8139cp 0000:00:02.0 eth0: link down
> > > > udhcpc: started, v1.33.0
> > > > EXT2-fs (mtdblock3): error: ext2_check_folio: bad entry in directory #363: : directory entry across blocks - offset=0, inode=27393, rec_len=3072, name_len=2
> > > > udhcpc: sending discover
> > > > udhcpc: sending discover
> > > > udhcpc: sending discover
> > > > EXT2-fs (mtdblock3): error: ext2_check_folio: bad entry in directory #363: : directory entry across blocks - offset=0, inode=27393, rec_len=3072, name_len=2
> > > 
> > > Thanks for report! Uh, I have to say I'm very confused by this. It is clear
> > > than when ext2 detects the directory corruption (we fail checking directory
> > > inode 363 which is likely /etc/init.d/), the boot fails in interesting
> > > ways. What is unclear is how the commit can possibly cause ext2 directory
> > > corruption.  If you didn't verify reverting the commit fixes the issue, I'd
> > > be suspecting bad bisection but that obviously isn't the case :-)
> > > 
> > > Ext2 is storing directory data in the page cache so at least it uses the
> > > subsystem which the patch impacts but how writeback throttling can cause
> > > ext2 directory corruption is beyond me. BTW, do you recreate the root
> > > filesystem before each boot? How exactly?
> > 
> > I use pre-built root file systems. For sheb, they are at
> > https://github.com/groeck/linux-build-test/tree/master/rootfs/sheb
> 
> Thanks. So the problematic directory is /usr/share/udhcpc/ where we
> read apparently bogus metadata at the beginning of that directory.

Ah, the metadata isn't bogus. But the entries in the directory are
apparently byte-swapped (little vs big endian). Is the machine actually
little or big endian?

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