On 12.03.19 г. 10:32 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/3/12 下午4:11, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12.03.19 г. 9:57 ч., Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12.03.19 г. 9:45 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>>> [BUG]
>>>> When reading a file from a fuzzed image, kernel can panic like:
>>>> BTRFS warning (device loop0): csum failed root 5 ino 270 off 0 csum
>>>> 0x98f94189 expected csum 0x00000000 mirror 1
>>>> assertion failed: !memcmp_extent_buffer(b, &disk_key, offsetof(struct
>>>> btrfs_leaf, items[0].key), sizeof(disk_key)), file: fs/btrfs/ctree.c,
>>>> line: 2544
>>>> ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>>> kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/ctree.h:3500!
>>>> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI
>>>> RIP: 0010:btrfs_search_slot.cold.24+0x61/0x63 [btrfs]
>>>> Call Trace:
>>>> btrfs_lookup_csum+0x52/0x150 [btrfs]
>>>> __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums+0x209/0x640 [btrfs]
>>>> btrfs_submit_bio_hook+0x103/0x170 [btrfs]
>>>> submit_one_bio+0x59/0x80 [btrfs]
>>>> extent_read_full_page+0x58/0x80 [btrfs]
>>>> generic_file_read_iter+0x2f6/0x9d0
>>>> __vfs_read+0x14d/0x1a0
>>>> vfs_read+0x8d/0x140
>>>> ksys_read+0x52/0xc0
>>>> do_syscall_64+0x60/0x210
>>>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>>>>
>>>> [CAUSE]
>>>> The fuzzed image has a corrupted leaf whose first key doesn't match with
>>>> its parent:
>>>> checksum tree key (CSUM_TREE ROOT_ITEM 0)
>>>> node 29741056 level 1 items 14 free 107 generation 19 owner CSUM_TREE
>>>> fs uuid 3381d111-94a3-4ac7-8f39-611bbbdab7e6
>>>> chunk uuid 9af1c3c7-2af5-488b-8553-530bd515f14c
>>>> ...
>>>> key (EXTENT_CSUM EXTENT_CSUM 79691776) block 29761536 gen 19
>>>>
>>>> leaf 29761536 items 1 free space 1726 generation 19 owner CSUM_TREE
>>>> leaf 29761536 flags 0x1(WRITTEN) backref revision 1
>>>> fs uuid 3381d111-94a3-4ac7-8f39-611bbbdab7e6
>>>> chunk uuid 9af1c3c7-2af5-488b-8553-530bd515f14c
>>>> item 0 key (EXTENT_CSUM EXTENT_CSUM 8798638964736) itemoff 1751
>>>> itemsize 2244
>>>> range start 8798638964736 end 8798641262592 length
>>>> 2297856
>>>>
>>>> For the first time tree read, it will not pass verify_level_key() check.
>>>> But the extent buffer will still be cached.
>>>>
>>>> Also there is a pitfall in read_block_for_search(), where a cached
>>>> extent buffer will not be checked for its level and first key.
>>>>
>>>> There are context where we read tree block without verifying its
>>>> first key, such as scrub.
>>>>
>>>> So in that case, a corrupted leaf can sneak in and screw up the kernel.
>>>>
>>>> [FIX]
>>>> Export verify_level_key() as btrfs_verify_level_key() and call it in
>>>> read_block_for_search() to fill the hole.
>>>>
>>>> Please note, this will cause a lot of extra error message if we have a
>>>> bad tree block in any hot tree, but it's still much better to trigger
>>>> the final safe net in key_search_validate().
>>>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> ret = -EIO;
>>>> - else if (verify_level_key(fs_info, eb, level,
>>>> - first_key, parent_transid))
>>>> + else if (btrfs_verify_level_key(fs_info, eb, level,
>>>> + first_key, parent_transid))
>>>> ret = -EUCLEAN;
>>>
>>> Actually why is the buffer still held when we return EUCLEAN since in
>>> read_tree_block if btree_read_extent_buffer_pages returns an error
>>> free_extent_buffer should be called and it should delete the eb from eb
>>> cache, no ? IMO the correct behavior should be to remove the corrupted
>>> buffer ASAP and not rely on later validation.
>>
>> Actually in this case the call to free_extent_buffer in read_tree_block
>> won't really clean the buffer since at this point the buffer has refs =
>> 2 (one from alloc_extent_buffer and one from being added to the tree),
>> however the code in free_extent_buffer won't execute the atomic_cmpxchg
>> to do the decrement nor will it execute the fix up right after the
>> spinlock if (refs==2 && EXTENT_BUFFER_STALE) which leaves only a single
>> call to atomic_dec_and_test in release_extent_buffer which will return
>> false. That's wrong.
>>
>>
>> The way to fix it is to either:
>> a) add a call to atomic_dec(eb->refs) so that the single call to
>> atomic_dec_and_test frees the eb
>>
>> b) call free_extent_buffer_stale which does atomic_dec itself, I'm more
>> inclined to use this option.
>
> Despite the scrub case I described, there is even a more possible case
> to sneak a bad eb into cache tree.
>
> One tree block shared by two snapshots, and one of the parent has bad key.
>
> Anyway, either method you mentioned can't solve either shared tree block
> nor the scrub case.
>
> So we still need the check, and keep the key_seach_validate() as final
> safe net.
Still, there seems to be a bug in the way failed eb's are handled during
normal read. Also your commit log doesn't describe how those ebs can
sneak in. Please describe the call chains in v2
>
> Thanks,
> Qu
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> else
>>>> break;
>>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
>>>> index 987a64bc0c66..67a9fe2d29c7 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
>>>> @@ -39,6 +39,9 @@ static inline u64 btrfs_sb_offset(int mirror)
>>>> struct btrfs_device;
>>>> struct btrfs_fs_devices;
>>>>
>>>> +int btrfs_verify_level_key(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
>>>> + struct extent_buffer *eb, int level,
>>>> + struct btrfs_key *first_key, u64 parent_transid);
>>>> struct extent_buffer *read_tree_block(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, u64
>>>> bytenr,
>>>> u64 parent_transid, int level,
>>>> struct btrfs_key *first_key);
>>>>
>>>
>
