From: Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>
To: asmadeus@codewreck.org
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
David Kahurani <k.kahurani@gmail.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, ericvh@gmail.com, kuba@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lucho@ionkov.net,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
Subject: Re: 9p EBADF with cache enabled (Was: 9p fs-cache tests/benchmark (was: 9p fscache Duplicate cookie detected))
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 18:46:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3645230.Tf70N6zClz@silver> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7091002.4ErQJAuLzZ@silver>
On Freitag, 6. Mai 2022 21:14:52 CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 4. Mai 2022 23:48:47 CEST asmadeus@codewreck.org wrote:
> > Christian Schoenebeck wrote on Wed, May 04, 2022 at 08:33:36PM +0200:
> > > On Dienstag, 3. Mai 2022 12:21:23 CEST asmadeus@codewreck.org wrote:
> > > > - add some complex code to track the exact byte range that got
> > > > updated
> > > >
> > > > in some conditions e.g. WRONLY or read fails?
> > > > That'd still be useful depending on how the backend tracks file mode,
> > > > qemu as user with security_model=mapped-file keeps files 600 but with
> > > > passthrough or none qemu wouldn't be able to read the file regardless
> > > > of
> > > > what we do on client...
> > > > Christian, if you still have an old kernel around did that use to
> > > > work?
> > >
> > > Sorry, what was the question, i.e. what should I test / look for
> > > precisely? :)
> >
> > I was curious if older kernel does not issue read at all, or issues read
> > on writeback fid correctly opened as root/RDRW
> >
> > You can try either the append.c I pasted a few mails back or the dd
> > commands, as regular user.
> >
> > $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=1M count=1
> > $ chmod 400 test
> > # drop cache or remount
> > $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=test bs=102 seek=2 count=1 conv=notrunc
> > dd: error writing 'test': Bad file descriptor
>
> Seems you were right, the old kernel opens the file with O_RDWR.
>
> The following was taken with cache=loose, pre-netfs kernel version, using
> your append code and file to be appended already containing 34 bytes,
> relevant file is fid 7:
>
> v9fs_open tag 0 id 12 fid 7 mode 2
> v9fs_open_return tag 0 id 12 qid={type 0 version 1651854932 path 3108899}
> iounit 4096 v9fs_xattrwalk tag 0 id 30 fid 5 newfid 8 name
> security.capability v9fs_rerror tag 0 id 30 err 95
> v9fs_read tag 0 id 116 fid 7 off 0 max_count 4096
> v9fs_read_return tag 0 id 116 count 34 err 45
> v9fs_read tag 0 id 116 fid 7 off 34 max_count 4062
> v9fs_read_return tag 0 id 116 count 0 err 11
> v9fs_clunk tag 0 id 120 fid 6
> v9fs_clunk tag 0 id 120 fid 4
> [delay]
> v9fs_write tag 0 id 118 fid 7 off 0 count 39 cnt 1
> v9fs_write_return tag 0 id 118 total 39 err 11
> v9fs_fsync tag 0 id 50 fid 7 datasync 0
>
> BTW to see this protocol debug output with QEMU:
>
> cd qemu/build
> ../configure --enable-trace-backends=log ...
> make -jN
> ./qemu-system-x86_64 -trace 'v9fs*' ...
I had another time slice on this issue today. As Dominique pointed out before,
the writeback_fid was and still is opened with O_RDWR [fs/9p/fid.c]:
struct p9_fid *v9fs_writeback_fid(struct dentry *dentry)
{
int err;
struct p9_fid *fid, *ofid;
ofid = v9fs_fid_lookup_with_uid(dentry, GLOBAL_ROOT_UID, 0);
fid = clone_fid(ofid);
if (IS_ERR(fid))
goto error_out;
p9_client_clunk(ofid);
/*
* writeback fid will only be used to write back the
* dirty pages. We always request for the open fid in read-write
* mode so that a partial page write which result in page
* read can work.
*/
err = p9_client_open(fid, O_RDWR);
if (err < 0) {
p9_client_clunk(fid);
fid = ERR_PTR(err);
goto error_out;
}
error_out:
return fid;
}
The problem rather seems to be that the new netfs code does not use the
writeback_fid when doing an implied read before the actual partial writeback.
As I showed in my previous email, the old pre-netfs kernel versions also did a
read before partial writebacks, but apparently used the special writeback_fid
for that.
I added some trap code to recent netfs kernel version:
diff --git a/net/9p/client.c b/net/9p/client.c
index 8bba0d9cf975..11ff1ee2130e 100644
--- a/net/9p/client.c
+++ b/net/9p/client.c
@@ -1549,12 +1549,21 @@ int p9_client_unlinkat(struct p9_fid *dfid, const char *name, int flags)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(p9_client_unlinkat);
+void p9_bug(void) {
+ BUG_ON(true);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(p9_bug);
+
int
p9_client_read(struct p9_fid *fid, u64 offset, struct iov_iter *to, int *err)
{
int total = 0;
*err = 0;
+ if ((fid->mode & O_ACCMODE) == O_WRONLY) {
+ p9_bug();
+ }
+
while (iov_iter_count(to)) {
int count;
@@ -1648,6 +1657,10 @@ p9_client_write(struct p9_fid *fid, u64 offset, struct iov_iter *from, int *err)
p9_debug(P9_DEBUG_9P, ">>> TWRITE fid %d offset %llu count %zd\n",
fid->fid, offset, iov_iter_count(from));
+ if ((fid->mode & O_ACCMODE) == O_RDONLY) {
+ p9_bug();
+ }
+
while (iov_iter_count(from)) {
int count = iov_iter_count(from);
int rsize = fid->iounit;
Which triggers the trap in p9_client_read() with cache=loose. Here is the
backtrace [based on d615b5416f8a1afeb82d13b238f8152c572d59c0]:
[ 139.365314] p9_client_read (net/9p/client.c:1553 net/9p/client.c:1564) 9pnet
[ 139.148806] v9fs_issue_read (fs/9p/vfs_addr.c:45) 9p
[ 139.149268] netfs_begin_read (fs/netfs/io.c:91 fs/netfs/io.c:579 fs/netfs/io.c:625) netfs
[ 139.149725] ? xas_load (lib/xarray.c:211 lib/xarray.c:242)
[ 139.150057] ? xa_load (lib/xarray.c:1469)
[ 139.150398] netfs_write_begin (fs/netfs/buffered_read.c:407) netfs
[ 139.150883] v9fs_write_begin (fs/9p/vfs_addr.c:279 (discriminator 2)) 9p
[ 139.151293] generic_perform_write (mm/filemap.c:3789)
[ 139.151721] ? generic_update_time (fs/inode.c:1858)
[ 139.152112] ? file_update_time (fs/inode.c:2089)
[ 139.152504] __generic_file_write_iter (mm/filemap.c:3916)
[ 139.152943] generic_file_write_iter (./include/linux/fs.h:753 mm/filemap.c:3948)
[ 139.153348] new_sync_write (fs/read_write.c:505 (discriminator 1))
[ 139.153754] vfs_write (fs/read_write.c:591)
[ 139.154090] ksys_write (fs/read_write.c:644)
[ 139.154417] do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80)
[ 139.154776] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:115)
I still had not time to read the netfs code part yet, but I assume netfs falls
back to a generic 9p read on the O_WRONLY opened fid here, instead of using
the special O_RDWR opened 'writeback_fid'.
Is there already some info available in the netfs API that the read is
actually part of a writeback task, so that we could force on 9p driver level
to use the special writeback_fid for the read in this case instead?
Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-03 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAAZOf26g-L2nSV-Siw6mwWQv1nv6on8c0fWqB4bKmX73QAFzow@mail.gmail.com>
2022-03-26 11:46 ` [syzbot] WARNING in p9_client_destroy David Kahurani
2022-03-26 11:48 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-03-26 12:24 ` asmadeus
2022-03-26 12:36 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-03-26 13:35 ` 9p fscache Duplicate cookie detected (Was: [syzbot] WARNING in p9_client_destroy) asmadeus
2022-03-30 12:21 ` 9p fs-cache tests/benchmark (was: 9p fscache Duplicate cookie detected) Christian Schoenebeck
2022-03-30 21:47 ` asmadeus
2022-04-01 14:19 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-01 23:11 ` asmadeus
2022-04-02 12:43 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-11 8:10 ` David Howells
2022-04-09 11:16 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-10 16:18 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-10 22:54 ` asmadeus
2022-04-11 13:41 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-12 22:38 ` asmadeus
2022-04-14 12:44 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-17 12:56 ` asmadeus
2022-04-17 13:52 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-17 21:22 ` asmadeus
2022-04-17 22:17 ` 9p EBADF with cache enabled (Was: 9p fs-cache tests/benchmark (was: 9p fscache Duplicate cookie detected)) asmadeus
2022-04-21 10:36 ` David Howells
2022-04-21 11:36 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-04-22 13:13 ` asmadeus
2022-04-25 14:10 ` David Howells
2022-04-26 15:38 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-05-03 10:21 ` asmadeus
2022-05-04 18:33 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-05-04 21:48 ` asmadeus
2022-05-06 19:14 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-06-03 16:46 ` Christian Schoenebeck [this message]
2022-06-12 10:02 ` asmadeus
2022-04-11 7:59 ` 9p fs-cache tests/benchmark (was: 9p fscache Duplicate cookie detected) David Howells
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=3645230.Tf70N6zClz@silver \
--to=linux_oss@crudebyte.com \
--cc=asmadeus@codewreck.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=groug@kaod.org \
--cc=k.kahurani@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lucho@ionkov.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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).