linux-kernel - [PATCH v2 09/16] ext4: fix zombie groups in average fragment size lists

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: <20250623073304.3275702-10-libaokun1@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 15:32:57 +0800
From: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
To: <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <tytso@....edu>, <jack@...e.cz>, <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	<ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<yi.zhang@...wei.com>, <yangerkun@...wei.com>, <libaokun1@...wei.com>,
	<stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 09/16] ext4: fix zombie groups in average fragment size lists

Groups with no free blocks shouldn't be in any average fragment size list.
However, when all blocks in a group are allocated(i.e., bb_fragments or
bb_free is 0), we currently skip updating the average fragment size, which
means the group isn't removed from its previous s_mb_avg_fragment_size[old]
list.

This created "zombie" groups that were always skipped during traversal as
they couldn't satisfy any block allocation requests, negatively impacting
traversal efficiency.

Therefore, when a group becomes completely free, bb_avg_fragment_size_order
is now set to -1. If the old order was not -1, a removal operation is
performed; if the new order is not -1, an insertion is performed.

Fixes: 196e402adf2e ("ext4: improve cr 0 / cr 1 group scanning")
CC: stable@...r.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
---
 fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 94950b07a577..e6d6c2da3c6e 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -841,30 +841,30 @@ static void
 mb_update_avg_fragment_size(struct super_block *sb, struct ext4_group_info *grp)
 {
 	struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb);
-	int new_order;
+	int new, old;
 
-	if (!test_opt2(sb, MB_OPTIMIZE_SCAN) || grp->bb_fragments == 0)
+	if (!test_opt2(sb, MB_OPTIMIZE_SCAN))
 		return;
 
-	new_order = mb_avg_fragment_size_order(sb,
-					grp->bb_free / grp->bb_fragments);
-	if (new_order == grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order)
+	old = grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order;
+	new = grp->bb_fragments == 0 ? -1 :
+	      mb_avg_fragment_size_order(sb, grp->bb_free / grp->bb_fragments);
+	if (new == old)
 		return;
 
-	if (grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order != -1) {
-		write_lock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[
-					grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order]);
+	if (old >= 0) {
+		write_lock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[old]);
 		list_del(&grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_node);
-		write_unlock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[
-					grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order]);
-	}
-	grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order = new_order;
-	write_lock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[
-					grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order]);
-	list_add_tail(&grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_node,
-		&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size[grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order]);
-	write_unlock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[
-					grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order]);
+		write_unlock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[old]);
+	}
+
+	grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order = new;
+	if (new >= 0) {
+		write_lock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[new]);
+		list_add_tail(&grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_node,
+				&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size[new]);
+		write_unlock(&sbi->s_mb_avg_fragment_size_locks[new]);
+	}
 }
 
 /*
-- 
2.46.1