From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: enadolski@suse.com, dsterba@suse.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "btrfs: add missing initialization in btrfs_check_shared" has been added to the 4.15-stable tree
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:02:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15214753735587@kroah.com> (raw)
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
btrfs: add missing initialization in btrfs_check_shared
to the 4.15-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
btrfs-add-missing-initialization-in-btrfs_check_shared.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.15 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
>From 18bf591ba9753e3e5ba91f38f756a800693408f4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Edmund Nadolski <enadolski@suse.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 09:03:11 -0600
Subject: btrfs: add missing initialization in btrfs_check_shared
From: Edmund Nadolski <enadolski@suse.com>
commit 18bf591ba9753e3e5ba91f38f756a800693408f4 upstream.
This patch addresses an issue that causes fiemap to falsely
report a shared extent. The test case is as follows:
xfs_io -f -d -c "pwrite -b 16k 0 64k" -c "fiemap -v" /media/scratch/file5
sync
xfs_io -c "fiemap -v" /media/scratch/file5
which gives the resulting output:
wrote 65536/65536 bytes at offset 0
64 KiB, 4 ops; 0.0000 sec (121.359 MiB/sec and 7766.9903 ops/sec)
/media/scratch/file5:
EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE TOTAL FLAGS
0: [0..127]: 24576..24703 128 0x2001
/media/scratch/file5:
EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE TOTAL FLAGS
0: [0..127]: 24576..24703 128 0x1
This is because btrfs_check_shared calls find_parent_nodes
repeatedly in a loop, passing a share_check struct to report
the count of shared extent. But btrfs_check_shared does not
re-initialize the count value to zero for subsequent calls
from the loop, resulting in a false share count value. This
is a regressive behavior from 4.13.
With proper re-initialization the test result is as follows:
wrote 65536/65536 bytes at offset 0
64 KiB, 4 ops; 0.0000 sec (110.035 MiB/sec and 7042.2535 ops/sec)
/media/scratch/file5:
EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE TOTAL FLAGS
0: [0..127]: 24576..24703 128 0x1
/media/scratch/file5:
EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE TOTAL FLAGS
0: [0..127]: 24576..24703 128 0x1
which corrects the regression.
Fixes: 3ec4d3238ab ("btrfs: allow backref search checks for shared extents")
Signed-off-by: Edmund Nadolski <enadolski@suse.com>
[ add text from cover letter to changelog ]
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
fs/btrfs/backref.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
--- a/fs/btrfs/backref.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/backref.c
@@ -1509,6 +1509,7 @@ int btrfs_check_shared(struct btrfs_root
if (!node)
break;
bytenr = node->val;
+ shared.share_count = 0;
cond_resched();
}
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from enadolski@suse.com are
queue-4.15/btrfs-add-missing-initialization-in-btrfs_check_shared.patch
reply other threads:[~2018-03-19 16:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=15214753735587@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=enadolski@suse.com \
--cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.