From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Cc: David Jeffery <djeffery@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] xfs: add missing ilock around dio write last extent alignment
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 10:43:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1441809812-60175-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> (raw)
The iomap codepath (via get_blocks()) acquires and release the inode
lock in the case of a direct write that requires block allocation. This
is because xfs_iomap_write_direct() allocates a transaction, which means
the ilock must be dropped and reacquired after the transaction is
allocated and reserved.
xfs_iomap_write_direct() invokes xfs_iomap_eof_align_last_fsb() before
the transaction is created and thus before the ilock is reacquired. This
can lead to calls to xfs_iread_extents() and reads of the in-core extent
list without any synchronization (via xfs_bmap_eof() and
xfs_bmap_last_extent()). xfs_iread_extents() assert fails if the ilock
is not held, but this is not currently seen in practice as the current
callers had already invoked xfs_bmapi_read().
What has been seen in practice are reports of crashes down in the
xfs_bmap_eof() codepath on direct writes due to seemingly bogus pointer
references from xfs_iext_get_ext(). While an explicit reproducer is not
currently available to confirm the cause of the problem, crash analysis
and code inspection from David Jeffrey had identified the insufficient
locking.
xfs_iomap_eof_align_last_fsb() is called from other contexts with the
inode lock already held. __xfs_get_blocks() acquires and drops the ilock
with variable flags. Therefore, take the simple approach to cycle ilock
around the last extent alignment call from xfs_iomap_write_direct().
Reported-by: David Jeffery <djeffery@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
---
fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
index 1f86033..4d7534e 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
@@ -142,7 +142,9 @@ xfs_iomap_write_direct(
offset_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSBT(mp, offset);
last_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, ((xfs_ufsize_t)(offset + count)));
if ((offset + count) > XFS_ISIZE(ip)) {
+ xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
error = xfs_iomap_eof_align_last_fsb(mp, ip, extsz, &last_fsb);
+ xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
if (error)
return error;
} else {
--
2.1.0
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next reply other threads:[~2015-09-09 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-09 14:43 Brian Foster [this message]
2015-09-13 23:58 ` [PATCH] xfs: add missing ilock around dio write last extent alignment Dave Chinner
2015-09-14 13:24 ` Brian Foster
2015-09-16 22:34 ` Dave Chinner
2015-09-17 12:16 ` Brian Foster
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=1441809812-60175-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=djeffery@redhat.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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