From: Jayashree Mohan <jayashree2912@gmail.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Vijaychidambaram Velayudhan Pillai <vijay@cs.utexas.edu>
Subject: btrfs crash consistency bug : Blocks allocated beyond eof are lost
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 20:23:53 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+EzBbCronNb25yxmn8zsSUwQqJC26fWJ+XmFo-jdBHSd9s3uA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Hi,
On btrfs (as of kernel 4.15), say we fallocate a file with keep_size
option, followed by fdatasync() or fsync(). If we now crash, on
recovery we see a wrong block count and all the blocks allocated
beyond the eof are lost. This bug was reported(xfstest generic/468)
and patched on ext4[1], and a variant of this, that did not recover
the correct file size was patched in f2fs[2]. I am wondering why this
is still not fixed in btrfs. You can reproduce this bug on btrfs using
a tool called CrashMonkey that we are building at UT Austin, which is
a test harness for filesystem crash consistency checks[3]
To reproduce the bug, simply run :
./c_harness -f /dev/sda -d /dev/cow_ram0 -t btrfs -e 102400 -v
tests/generic_468.so
Is there a reason why this is not yet patched in btrfs? I don't see
why even after a fsync(), losing the blocks allocated beyond the eof
are acceptable.
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10120293/
[2] https://sourceforge.net/p/linux-f2fs/mailman/message/36104201/
[3] https://github.com/utsaslab/crashmonkey
Thanks,
Jayashree Mohan
2nd Year PhD in Computer Science
University of Texas at Austin.
next reply other threads:[~2018-02-22 2:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-22 2:23 Jayashree Mohan [this message]
2018-02-23 16:35 ` btrfs crash consistency bug : Blocks allocated beyond eof are lost Jayashree Mohan
2018-02-23 16:40 ` Filipe Manana
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=CA+EzBbCronNb25yxmn8zsSUwQqJC26fWJ+XmFo-jdBHSd9s3uA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jayashree2912@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vijay@cs.utexas.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).