Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: transactionless xfs_bunmapi shouldn't do format conversion

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:06:52PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:27:59PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:54:05PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:41:27PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > > > 
> > > > If we are punching out a delalloc extent, xfs_bunmapi() does not
> > > > have a transaction context and should not ever need to convert the
> > > > on-disk extent format. If such a thing is attempted (e.g. via a
> > > > corrupt inode extent count in extent format) then we should abort
> > > > with an EFSCORRUPTED error. Unfortunately, we don't do that and
> > > > crash instead:
> > > > 
> > > >  XFS (loop0): page discard on page 0000000005fd24f3, inode 0x75e5, offset 0.
> > > >  ==================================================================
> > > >  BUG: KASAN: null-ptr-deref in xfs_alloc_get_freelist+0x115/0x350
> > > >  Read of size 8 at addr 0000000000000028 by task a.out/1406
> > > >  CPU: 0 PID: 1406 Comm: a.out Not tainted 4.17.0-rc4-kasan #2
> > > >  Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Ubuntu-1.8.2-1ubuntu1 04/01/2014
> > > >  Call Trace:
> > > >   dump_stack+0x7b/0xb5
> > > >   kasan_report+0x10c/0x390
> > > >   __asan_load8+0x54/0x90
> > > >   xfs_alloc_get_freelist+0x115/0x350
> > > >   xfs_alloc_fix_freelist+0x35b/0x830
> > > >   xfs_alloc_vextent+0x215/0x990
> > > >   xfs_bmap_extents_to_btree+0x30d/0x940
> > > > .....
> > > > 
> > > > By returning an error here, we avoid such crashes when punching out
> > > > a delalloc page because we don't try to fix up an AG freelist
> > > > without a transaction. Hence we get an error like so:
> > > 
> > > Um, isn't erroring out here leaving a dirty bomb in the in-core metadata?
> > 
> > Not that I can tell. We've already trashed the dirty page state by
> > this point, so the page cache can safely reclaim the page and the
> > delalloc range over it will never get written.  And the XFS inode
> > cleanup code didn't have any issues with the way the error was
> > handled, either, because the delalloc range was actually removed
> > before the fork format error was triggered.
> > 
> > IOWs, there is no dirty, stale page state or delalloc extents
> > hanging around if this error fires.
> 
> Hmmm, well I guess I'll pull this one in and look for problems.
> 
> I wonder, is there a <cough> testcase for this?  Or a fuzz-o-matic to
> turn all these things into regression tests?

No test case. Should be able to create one easily enough with
xfs_db, though I haven't tried. Do the inode fuzzer tests screw with
the extent count?

> > But OTOH, I don't want to risk a bunch of filesystem corrupting
> > regressions across the entire XFS userbase just to fix a trivially
> > simple crash that requires an extremely unlikely co-ordinated
> > corruption of an inode data fork and an AGFL, and to simultaneously
> > have ENOSPC in every other AGF in the filesystem.
> > 
> > Put "refactor xfs_bunmapi()" on the list of "things to do when
> > there's nothing else to do"...
> 
> So in 2066 after the polar ice caps melt after the XFS LOGHAMMER attack
> has finally been put down?  Ok. :)

I'm sure someone will have reason to factor it before then :P

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com