lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] block integrity: Fix write after checksum calculation problem
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-04-11 at 13:41 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> Excerpts from Jeff Layton's message of 2011-04-11 12:42:29 -0400:
> > > @@ -5839,6 +5844,15 @@ int ext4_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > > if (ret < 0)
> > > goto out_unlock;
> > > ret = 0;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * write_begin/end might have created a dirty page and someone
> > > + * could wander in and start the IO. Make sure that hasn't
> > > + * happened.
> > > + */
> > > + lock_page(page);
> > > + wait_on_page_writeback(page);
> > > + unlock_page(page);
> >

I am little puzzled here. if someone wander in and start the IO, the
page is up-to-date (dirtied by this page_mkwrite). We shouldn't see the
checksum inconsistancy, right?

> > nit:
> >
> > The callers of page_mkwrite always lock the page afterward if you
> > return from page_mkwrite with it unlocked. If you plan to take page
> > lock anyway, it's probably slightly more efficient not to unlock it and
> > instead return VM_FAULT_LOCKED.
> >
>
> Actually this isn't a nit. Keeping the page locked closes an important
> hole where it can become writeback again. It might fix the last
> remaining problem.
>

Oh, right. Currently ext4_page_mkwrite drops the page lock before
calling it's dirty the page (by write_begin() and write_end(). I
suspect regrab the lock() after write_end() (with your proposed change)
and returning with locked still leave the dirty by ext4_page_mkwrite
unlocked. We probably should to keep the page locked the page during
the entire ext4_page_mkwrite() call. Any reason to drop the page lock()
before calling aops->write_begin()?

Mingming



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-12 02:49    [W:0.127 / U:28.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site