From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>
To: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@linux.dev>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>,
Harshad Shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix infinite loop when replaying fast_commit
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 16:52:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <326db1c7-1064-d19c-0028-d2149c61f6f5@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pltniimq.fsf@brahms.olymp>
On 2024/5/15 16:28, Luis Henriques wrote:
> On Wed 15 May 2024 12:59:26 PM +08, Zhang Yi wrote;
>
>> On 2024/5/14 21:04, Luis Henriques wrote:
>>> On Sat 11 May 2024 02:24:17 PM +08, Zhang Yi wrote;
>>>
>>>> On 2024/5/10 19:52, Luis Henriques (SUSE) wrote:
>>>>> When doing fast_commit replay an infinite loop may occur due to an
>>>>> uninitialized extent_status struct. ext4_ext_determine_insert_hole() does
>>>>> not detect the replay and calls ext4_es_find_extent_range(), which will
>>>>> return immediately without initializing the 'es' variable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because 'es' contains garbage, an integer overflow may happen causing an
>>>>> infinite loop in this function, easily reproducible using fstest generic/039.
>>>>>
>>>>> This commit fixes this issue by detecting the replay in function
>>>>> ext4_ext_determine_insert_hole(). It also adds initialization code to the
>>>>> error path in function ext4_es_find_extent_range().
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to Zhang Yi, for figuring out the real problem!
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 8016e29f4362 ("ext4: fast commit recovery path")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques (SUSE) <luis.henriques@linux.dev>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>
>>>>> Two comments:
>>>>> 1) The change in ext4_ext_map_blocks() could probably use the min_not_zero
>>>>> macro instead. I decided not to do so simply because I wasn't sure if
>>>>> that would be safe, but I'm fine changing that if you think it is.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) I thought about returning 'EXT_MAX_BLOCKS' instead of '0' in
>>>>> ext4_lblk_t ext4_ext_determine_insert_hole(), which would then avoid
>>>>> the extra change to ext4_ext_map_blocks(). '0' sounds like the right
>>>>> value to return, but I'm also OK using 'EXT_MAX_BLOCKS' instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> And again thanks to Zhang Yi for pointing me the *real* problem!
>>>>>
>>>>> fs/ext4/extents.c | 6 +++++-
>>>>> fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 5 ++++-
>>>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c
>>>>> index e57054bdc5fd..b5bfcb6c18a0 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
>>>>> @@ -4052,6 +4052,9 @@ static ext4_lblk_t ext4_ext_determine_insert_hole(struct inode *inode,
>>>>> ext4_lblk_t hole_start, len;
>>>>> struct extent_status es;
>>>>>
>>>>> + if (EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_mount_state & EXT4_FC_REPLAY)
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I think it's may not correct. When replaying the jouranl, although
>>>> we don't use the extent statue tree, we still need to query the accurate
>>>> hole length, e.g. please see skip_hole(). If you do this, the hole length
>>>> becomes incorrect, right?
>>>
>>> Thank you for your review (and sorry for my delay replying).
>>>
>>> So, I see three different options to follow your suggestion:
>>>
>>> 1) Initialize 'es' immediately when declaring it in function
>>> ext4_ext_determine_insert_hole():
>>>
>>> es.es_lblk = es.es_len = es.es_pblk = 0;
>>>
>>> 2) Initialize 'es' only in ext4_es_find_extent_range() when checking if an
>>> fc replay is in progress (my patch was already doing something like
>>> that):
>>>
>>> if (EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_mount_state & EXT4_FC_REPLAY) {
>>> /* Initialize extent to zero */
>>> es->es_lblk = es->es_len = es->es_pblk = 0;
>>> return;
>>> }
>>>
>>> 3) Remove the check for fc replay in function ext4_es_find_extent_range(),
>>> which will then unconditionally call __es_find_extent_range(). This
>>> will effectively also initialize the 'es' fields to '0' and, because
>>> __es_tree_search() will return NULL (at least in generic/039 test!),
>>> nothing else will be done.
>>>
>>> Since all these 3 options seem to have the same result, I believe option
>>> 1) is probably the best as it initializes the structure shortly after it's
>>> declaration. Would you agree? Or did I misunderstood you?
>>>
>>
>> Both 1 and 2 are looks fine to me, but I would prefer to initialize it
>> unconditionally in ext4_es_find_extent_range().
>>
>> @@ -310,6 +310,8 @@ void ext4_es_find_extent_range(struct inode *inode,
>> ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_lblk_t end,
>> struct extent_status *es)
>> {
>> + es->es_lblk = es->es_len = es->es_pblk = 0;
>> +
>> if (EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_mount_state & EXT4_FC_REPLAY)
>> return;
>
> Thank you, Yi. I'll send out v2 shortly. Although, to be fair, the real
> patch author shouldn't be me. :-)
>
Never mind, I just give a suggestion and also I didn't do a full test on
this change.
Thanks,
Yi.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-15 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-10 11:52 [PATCH] ext4: fix infinite loop when replaying fast_commit Luis Henriques (SUSE)
2024-05-11 6:24 ` Zhang Yi
2024-05-14 13:04 ` Luis Henriques
2024-05-15 4:59 ` Zhang Yi
2024-05-15 8:28 ` Luis Henriques
2024-05-15 8:52 ` Zhang Yi [this message]
2024-05-15 9:13 ` Luis Henriques
2024-05-15 12:24 ` Zhang Yi
2024-05-12 16:44 ` Markus Elfring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=326db1c7-1064-d19c-0028-d2149c61f6f5@huaweicloud.com \
--to=yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luis.henriques@linux.dev \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).