* FAILED: patch "[PATCH] ceph: fix num_ops off-by-one when crypto allocation fails" failed to apply to 6.6-stable tree
@ 2026-05-04 8:49 gregkh
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: gregkh @ 2026-05-04 8:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cfsworks, CFSworks, Slava.Dubeyko, idryomov; +Cc: stable
The patch below does not apply to the 6.6-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-6.6.y
git checkout FETCH_HEAD
git cherry-pick -x a0d9555bf9eaeba34fe6b6bb86f442fe08ba3842
# <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
git commit -s
git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2026050455-worry-catalog-1445@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 6.6.y' HEAD^..
Possible dependencies:
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From a0d9555bf9eaeba34fe6b6bb86f442fe08ba3842 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sam Edwards <cfsworks@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 19:37:33 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] ceph: fix num_ops off-by-one when crypto allocation fails
move_dirty_folio_in_page_array() may fail if the file is encrypted, the
dirty folio is not the first in the batch, and it fails to allocate a
bounce buffer to hold the ciphertext. When that happens,
ceph_process_folio_batch() simply redirties the folio and flushes the
current batch -- it can retry that folio in a future batch.
However, if this failed folio is not contiguous with the last folio that
did make it into the batch, then ceph_process_folio_batch() has already
incremented `ceph_wbc->num_ops`; because it doesn't follow through and
add the discontiguous folio to the array, ceph_submit_write() -- which
expects that `ceph_wbc->num_ops` accurately reflects the number of
contiguous ranges (and therefore the required number of "write extent"
ops) in the writeback -- will panic the kernel:
BUG_ON(ceph_wbc->op_idx + 1 != req->r_num_ops);
This issue can be reproduced on affected kernels by writing to
fscrypt-enabled CephFS file(s) with a 4KiB-written/4KiB-skipped/repeat
pattern (total filesize should not matter) and gradually increasing the
system's memory pressure until a bounce buffer allocation fails.
Fix this crash by decrementing `ceph_wbc->num_ops` back to the correct
value when move_dirty_folio_in_page_array() fails, but the folio already
started counting a new (i.e. still-empty) extent.
The defect corrected by this patch has existed since 2022 (see first
`Fixes:`), but another bug blocked multi-folio encrypted writeback until
recently (see second `Fixes:`). The second commit made it into 6.18.16,
6.19.6, and 7.0-rc1, unmasking the panic in those versions. This patch
therefore fixes a regression (panic) introduced by cac190c7674f.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: d55207717ded ("ceph: add encryption support to writepage and writepages")
Fixes: cac190c7674f ("ceph: fix write storm on fscrypted files")
Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
diff --git a/fs/ceph/addr.c b/fs/ceph/addr.c
index 2090fc78529c..44553556ac74 100644
--- a/fs/ceph/addr.c
+++ b/fs/ceph/addr.c
@@ -1365,6 +1365,10 @@ void ceph_process_folio_batch(struct address_space *mapping,
rc = move_dirty_folio_in_page_array(mapping, wbc, ceph_wbc,
folio);
if (rc) {
+ /* Did we just begin a new contiguous op? Nevermind! */
+ if (ceph_wbc->len == 0)
+ ceph_wbc->num_ops--;
+
folio_redirty_for_writepage(wbc, folio);
folio_unlock(folio);
break;
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2026-05-04 8:50 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-05-04 8:49 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] ceph: fix num_ops off-by-one when crypto allocation fails" failed to apply to 6.6-stable tree gregkh
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox