public inbox for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca,
	jack@suse.cz, yi.zhang@huawei.com, chengzhihao1@huawei.com,
	yukuai3@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] jbd2: skip reading super block if it has been verified
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2023 01:26:54 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230615052654.GF51259@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230615034941.2335484-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 11:49:41AM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
> From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
> 
> We got a NULL pointer dereference issue below while running generic/475
> I/O failure pressure test.

Have you been able to reproduce this failure without the "recheck
checkpoint" series applied?  I have not, so like with the e2fsck bug
fix, I can understand how the bug fix worked, but I still don't
understand why I wasn't seeing until I tried to apply the "recheck
chekcpoint" and the following patches in that patch series.

> If the journal super block had been read and verified, there is no need
> to call bh_read() read it again even if it has been failed to written
> out. So the fix could be simply move buffer_verified(bh) in front of
> bh_read().
> 
> Fixes: d9eafe0afafa ("jbd2: factor out journal initialization from journal_get_superblock()")

That works, but it's worth noting that commit d9eafe0afafa caused the
failure by removing the check on j_journal_version to determine
whether the superblock was read or not.  If the journal superblock had
been previously read, j_journal_version would be either 1 or 2.  If it
had been zero, then superblock was not read.  So from commit
d9eafe0afafa:

 	/* Load journal superblock if it is not loaded yet. */
-	if (journal->j_format_version == 0 &&
-	    journal_get_superblock(journal) != 0)
+	if (journal_get_superblock(journal))
 		return 0;
 	if (!jbd2_format_support_feature(journal))
 		return 0;


The comment "Load journal superblock if it is not loaded yet." should
be removed, since it no longer makes sense once the
"journal->j_format_version == 0" check was removed.

I'll also note that a problem with d9eafe0afafa is that by removing
the j_format_version check, every time we add a revoke header, and we
call jbd2_journal_set_features(), this was causing an unconditional
read of the journal superblock and that unnecessary I/O could slow
down certain workloads.

						- Ted

  reply	other threads:[~2023-06-15  5:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-15  3:49 [PATCH] jbd2: skip reading super block if it has been verified Zhang Yi
2023-06-15  5:26 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2023-06-15  8:22   ` Zhang Yi

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=20230615052654.GF51259@mit.edu \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
    --cc=chengzhihao1@huawei.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    /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