From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
"kumba@gentoo.org" <kumba@gentoo.org>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md/bitmap: avoid read out of the disk
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 16:16:33 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wp3zlj9q.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ED3BAA5A-9A7B-4FA1-BC4E-299F1A69D9E7@fb.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3051 bytes --]
On Thu, Oct 12 2017, Song Liu wrote:
>> On Oct 12, 2017, at 10:30 AM, Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 02:09:21PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 10 2017, Shaohua Li wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
>>>>
>>>> If PAGE_SIZE is bigger than 4k, we could read out of the disk boundary. Limit
>>>> the read size to the end of disk. Write path already has similar limitation.
>>>>
>>>> Fix: 8031c3ddc70a(md/bitmap: copy correct data for bitmap super)
>>>> Reported-by: Joshua Kinard <kumba@gentoo.org>
>>>> Tested-by: Joshua Kinard <kumba@gentoo.org>
>>>> Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
>>>
>>> Given that this bug was introduced by
>>> Commit: 8031c3ddc70a ("md/bitmap: copy correct data for bitmap super")
>>>
>>> and that patch is markted:
>>>
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org (4.10+)
>>>
>>> I think this patch should be tagged "CC: stable" too.
>>
>> I thought the Fix tag is enough, but I'll add the stable
>>> However ... that earlier patch looks strange to me.
>>> Why is it that "raid5 cache could write bitmap superblock before bitmap superblock is
>>> initialized." Can we just get raid5 cache *not* to write the bitmap
>>> superblock too early?
>>> I think that would better than breaking code that previously worked.
>>
>> That's the log reply code, which must update superblock and hence bitmap
>> superblock, because reply happens very earlier. I agree the reply might still
>> have problem with bitmap. We'd better defer reply after the raid is fully
>> initialized. Song, any idea?
>>
>
> With write back cache, there are two different types of stripes in recovery:
> data-parity, and data-only. For data-parity stripes, we can simply replay data
> from the journal. But for data-only stripes, we need to do rcw or rmw to update
> parities. Currently, the writes are handled with raid5 state machine. Therefore,
> we wake up mddev->thread in r5l_recovery_log(). It is necessary to finish these
> stripes before we fully initialize the array, because these stripes need to be
> handled with write back state machine; while we we always start the array with
> write through journal_mode.
>
> Maybe we can fix this by change the order of initialization in md_run(),
> specifically, moving bitmap_create() before pers->run().
I've looked at some of the details here now.
I think I would like raid5-cache to not perform any recovery until we
reach
md_wakeup_thread(mddev->thread);
md_wakeup_thread(mddev->sync_thread); /* possibly kick off a reshape */
in do_md_run(). Before that point it is possible to fail and abort -
e.g. if bitmap_load() fails.
Possibly we could insert another personality call here "->start()" ??
That could then do whatever is needed before
set_capacity(mddev->gendisk, mddev->array_sectors);
revalidate_disk(mddev->gendisk);
makes the array accessible.
Might that be reasonable?
Thanks,
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-13 5:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-10 21:20 [PATCH] md/bitmap: avoid read out of the disk Shaohua Li
2017-10-11 12:41 ` Joshua Kinard
2017-10-12 3:09 ` NeilBrown
2017-10-12 17:30 ` Shaohua Li
2017-10-12 17:53 ` Song Liu
2017-10-12 21:46 ` NeilBrown
2017-10-12 22:51 ` Shaohua Li
2017-10-13 5:16 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2017-10-13 19:51 ` Shaohua Li
2017-10-16 16:21 ` Song Liu
2017-10-16 21:15 ` NeilBrown
2017-10-16 23:56 ` Shaohua Li
2017-10-17 3:24 ` [PATCH] md: forbid a RAID5 from having both a bitmap and a journal NeilBrown
2017-10-17 20:41 ` John Stoffel
2017-10-17 21:03 ` NeilBrown
2017-10-18 1:51 ` Joshua Kinard
2017-10-19 23:16 ` Wols Lists
2017-10-18 14:48 ` John Stoffel
2017-10-19 23:21 ` Wols Lists
2017-10-18 1:50 ` Joshua Kinard
2017-10-19 3:16 ` Shaohua Li
2017-10-12 21:44 ` [PATCH] md/bitmap: avoid read out of the disk NeilBrown
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=87wp3zlj9q.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
--to=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=kumba@gentoo.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@fb.com \
--cc=shli@kernel.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).