From: Moritz Tanner <moritz.tanner@linbit.com>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Moritz Tanner <moritz.tanner@linbit.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] fs: don't return -EINVAL for successful nested thaw
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 10:54:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260821085451.65206-1-moritz.tanner@linbit.com> (raw)
Commit 7366f8b6fc6a ("fs: handle freezing from multiple devices")
replaced the freeze_holders bitmask with per-holder counters to allow
nested freezes. In the bitmask version, a thaw that released a shared
hold while another holder remained returned 0. Since the rework,
thaw_super_locked() drops the freeze reference via freeze_dec() but
then returns -EINVAL when other freezers remain, misinforming the
caller: the thaw did succeed, the superblock just stays frozen for the
remaining holders.
This breaks bdev-initiated freezing. When a filesystem is frozen with
FIFREEZE and additionally frozen via bdev_freeze() -- which nests by
design, see fs_bdev_freeze() -- the subsequent bdev_thaw() receives
-EINVAL from the holder op although its freeze reference was dropped,
and therefore keeps bd_fsfreeze_count elevated. Then device-mapper's
unlock_fs() ignores bdev_thaw()'s return value, so nothing rebalances
the count. After the user's FITHAW and umount, the block device can
never be mounted again:
dm-1: Can't mount, blockdev is frozen
There is no way for userspace to drop the leaked count; only
destroying the block device (or a reboot) recovers the device.
Reproducer (any kernel since v6.8):
dmsetup create dut --table "0 $(blockdev --getsz "$DEV") linear $DEV 0"
mkfs.ext4 /dev/mapper/dut
mount /dev/mapper/dut /mnt
fsfreeze --freeze /mnt # freeze_ucount == 1
dmsetup suspend dut # bd_fsfreeze_count == 1, ucount == 2
dmsetup resume dut # ucount 2 -> 1, but thaw_super()
# returns -EINVAL, so bdev_thaw()
# keeps bd_fsfreeze_count at 1
fsfreeze --unfreeze /mnt # filesystem thaws fine
umount /mnt
mount /dev/mapper/dut /mnt # EBUSY, forever
The same happens with fsfreeze held across an LVM snapshot of the
origin volume.
fs_bdev_thaw()'s documentation already describes the intended
semantics: "If this function returns zero it doesn't mean that the
filesystem is unfrozen as it may have been frozen multiple times".
Restore them by returning 0 when a nested thaw drops its hold while
other freezers remain. Thawing without holding a freeze still fails
with -EINVAL as may_unfreeze() rejects that case before the reference
count is touched.
Fixes: 7366f8b6fc6a ("fs: handle freezing from multiple devices")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # needs adjustments for < 6.17 (no may_unfreeze())
Signed-off-by: Moritz Tanner <moritz.tanner@linbit.com>
---
fs/super.c | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index 05e443173038..01db6124e409 100644
--- a/fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/super.c
@@ -2369,11 +2369,14 @@ static int thaw_super_locked(struct super_block *sb, enum freeze_holder who,
goto out_unlock;
/*
- * All freezers share a single active reference.
- * So just unlock in case there are any left.
+ * All freezers share a single active reference. If other freezers
+ * remain, drop our hold and report success; the superblock stays
+ * frozen until the last holder thaws it.
*/
- if (freeze_dec(sb, who))
+ if (freeze_dec(sb, who)) {
+ error = 0;
goto out_unlock;
+ }
if (sb_rdonly(sb)) {
sb->s_writers.frozen = SB_UNFROZEN;
--
2.55.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-08-21 8:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-21 8:54 Moritz Tanner [this message]
2026-08-21 9:47 ` [PATCH] fs: don't return -EINVAL for successful nested thaw Lars Ellenberg
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=20260821085451.65206-1-moritz.tanner@linbit.com \
--to=moritz.tanner@linbit.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.