lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 5.0 152/238] jbd2: clear dirty flag when revoking a buffer from an older transaction
Date
5.0-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: zhangyi (F) <yi.zhang@huawei.com>

commit 904cdbd41d749a476863a0ca41f6f396774f26e4 upstream.

Now, we capture a data corruption problem on ext4 while we're truncating
an extent index block. Imaging that if we are revoking a buffer which
has been journaled by the committing transaction, the buffer's jbddirty
flag will not be cleared in jbd2_journal_forget(), so the commit code
will set the buffer dirty flag again after refile the buffer.

fsx kjournald2
jbd2_journal_commit_transaction
jbd2_journal_revoke commit phase 1~5...
jbd2_journal_forget
belongs to older transaction commit phase 6
jbddirty not clear __jbd2_journal_refile_buffer
__jbd2_journal_unfile_buffer
test_clear_buffer_jbddirty
mark_buffer_dirty

Finally, if the freed extent index block was allocated again as data
block by some other files, it may corrupt the file data after writing
cached pages later, such as during unmount time. (In general,
clean_bdev_aliases() related helpers should be invoked after
re-allocation to prevent the above corruption, but unfortunately we
missed it when zeroout the head of extra extent blocks in
ext4_ext_handle_unwritten_extents()).

This patch mark buffer as freed and set j_next_transaction to the new
transaction when it already belongs to the committing transaction in
jbd2_journal_forget(), so that commit code knows it should clear dirty
bits when it is done with the buffer.

This problem can be reproduced by xfstests generic/455 easily with
seeds (3246 3247 3248 3249).

Signed-off-by: zhangyi (F) <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
fs/jbd2/transaction.c | 17 ++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/jbd2/transaction.c
+++ b/fs/jbd2/transaction.c
@@ -1609,14 +1609,21 @@ int jbd2_journal_forget (handle_t *handl
/* However, if the buffer is still owned by a prior
* (committing) transaction, we can't drop it yet... */
JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "belongs to older transaction");
- /* ... but we CAN drop it from the new transaction if we
- * have also modified it since the original commit. */
+ /* ... but we CAN drop it from the new transaction through
+ * marking the buffer as freed and set j_next_transaction to
+ * the new transaction, so that not only the commit code
+ * knows it should clear dirty bits when it is done with the
+ * buffer, but also the buffer can be checkpointed only
+ * after the new transaction commits. */

- if (jh->b_next_transaction) {
- J_ASSERT(jh->b_next_transaction == transaction);
+ set_buffer_freed(bh);
+
+ if (!jh->b_next_transaction) {
spin_lock(&journal->j_list_lock);
- jh->b_next_transaction = NULL;
+ jh->b_next_transaction = transaction;
spin_unlock(&journal->j_list_lock);
+ } else {
+ J_ASSERT(jh->b_next_transaction == transaction);

/*
* only drop a reference if this transaction modified

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-22 13:30    [W:0.561 / U:5.852 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site