Util-Linux package development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>
To: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com>
Cc: util-linux@vger.kernel.org, Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>,
	systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	David Reaver <me@davidreaver.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH] libblkid: fix spurious ext superblock checksum mismatches
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 23:36:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZzvBgOP_skwId4ci@gardel-login> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6d16e6d83ab48d2ea4402db17c9c0ed5514933a7.1731961869.git.kjlx@templeofstupid.com>

On Mo, 18.11.24 12:35, Krister Johansen (kjlx@templeofstupid.com) wrote:

> Reads of ext superblocks can race with updates.  If libblkid observes a
> checksum mismatch, re-read the superblock with O_DIRECT in order to get
> a consistent view of its contents.  Only if the O_DIRECT read fails the
> checksum should it be reported to have failed.
>
> This fixes a problem where devices that were named by filesystem label
> failed to be found when systemd attempted to mount them on boot.  The
> problem was caused by systemd-udevd using libblkid. If a read of a
> superblock resulted in a checksum mismatch, udev will remove the
> by-label links which result in the mount call failing to find the
> device.  The checksum mismatch that was triggering the problem was
> spurious, and when we use O_DIRECT, or even perform a subsequent retry,
> the superblock is correctly read.  This resulted in a failure to mount
> /boot in one out of every 2,000 or so attempts in our environment.
>
> e2fsprogs fixed[1] an identical version of this bug that afflicted
> resize2fs during online grow operations when run from cloud-init.  The
> fix there was also to use O_DIRECT in order to read the superblock.
> This patch uses a similar approach: read the superblock with O_DIRECT in
> the case where a bad checksum is detected.

Umpf. udev has a clearly defined protocol to comprehensively avoid
such issues:

https://systemd.io/BLOCK_DEVICE_LOCKING

Partitioning tools should simply follow this logic, and udev and
programs downstream from it will not even be tempted to operate with
half-written superblocks, partition tables or such.

Hence, I personally am not convinced of that O_DIRECT approach. First
of all, it only works on superblocks that have a useful checksum
covering enough relevant data, and it can never really catch scenarios
where a disk is comprehensively repartitioned, i.e. one or more fs and
partition metadata changed at the same time...

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin

  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-18 22:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-18 20:35 [PATCH] libblkid: fix spurious ext superblock checksum mismatches Krister Johansen
2024-11-18 22:36 ` Lennart Poettering [this message]
2024-11-18 23:13   ` [systemd-devel] " Krister Johansen
2024-11-19  8:19     ` [EXT] " Windl, Ulrich
2024-11-19  8:15 ` [EXT] " Windl, Ulrich
2024-11-19 17:49   ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-11-19 23:59     ` Krister Johansen
2024-11-20  6:07       ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-11-21 10:44     ` Karel Zak
2024-11-21 15:55       ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-11-22  8:54       ` Krister Johansen

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=ZzvBgOP_skwId4ci@gardel-login \
    --to=lennart@poettering.net \
    --cc=kjlx@templeofstupid.com \
    --cc=kzak@redhat.com \
    --cc=me@davidreaver.com \
    --cc=systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=util-linux@vger.kernel.org \
    /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