Re: [PATCH 03/10] ext4: fix unwritten counter leakage

[Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 14:34:20 +0200, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> On Thu 27-09-12 16:19:01, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:07:14 +0200, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > On Mon 24-09-12 15:44:13, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > > > ext4_set_io_unwritten_flag() will increment i_unwritten counter, so
> > > > once we mark end_io with END_IO_UNWRITTEN we have to revert it back
> > >                            ^^ EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN
> > > > on error path.
> > > > 
> > > >  - add missed error checks to prevent counter leakage
> > > >  - ext4_end_io_nolock() will clear END_IO_UNWRITTEN flag to signal
> > >                                      ^^ EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN
> > > >    that conversion finished.
> > > >  - add BUGON to free_end_io() to prevent similar leackage in future.
> > >          ^^ BUG_ON    ^^ext4_free_io_end()         ^^ leakage
> > > 
> > > > Visiable effect of this bug is that unaligned aio_stress may deadlock
> > >   ^^ Visible
> > > 
> > >   Umm, and won't it be more foolproof it we just decrement i_unwritten in
> > > ext4_free_io_end() when we see EXT4_IO_END_UNWRITTEN set?
> > I'd like to consider BUG_ON inside ext4_free_io_end as a sanity check to
> > force all callers to perform all necessary error checks in known context. 
>   I'm not sure how "performing all necessary error checks in known context"
> relates to ext4_free_io_end() cleaning up the structure on its own or
> whether someone has to do it beforehand... Can you maybe elaborate a bit
> more?
I assume that if end_io was tagged with UNWRITTEN flag it should goes trough
complete_io_list and end_io_nolock(), or caller should cancel it by
itself in case of error, otherwise we may miss valid unwritten end_io
but was not scheduled to complete_end_io routine by occasion (and endup
in silent data loss). In my opinion at the time then ext4_free_io_end() 
was called all possible conversions should be completed.
> 
> > >   That still leaves the mess with EXT4_STATE_DIO_UNWRITTEN unhandled. But
> > > that's a separate issue. We seem to clear that flag only in
> > > ext4_ext_direct_IO() although it could be set even when buffered write
> > > converts extents. And error cases seem to be buggy as well.
> > No, each unwritten extent will be added to i_complete_io_list regardless
> > to it's origin (buffered or DIO), and will be completed via
> > ext4_end_io_nolock(). So assertion is correct.
>   Yes, I agree with what you say. My note was just an off-topic rambling
> about inode flag EXT4_STATE_DIO_UNWRITTEN whose handling seem to be buggy
> as well.
> 
> 								Honza
> -- 
> Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> SUSE Labs, CR
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html