On Mon, 2018-05-28 at 12:02 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
>
> [ Upstream commit 8434ec46c6e3232cebc25a910363b29f5c617820 ]
Should stable branches also get a backport of commit
4ee3fad34a9cc2cf33303dfbd0cf554248651c86? It looks like 4.4 and 4.9
would need a minor change (inode->root to BTRFS_I(inode)->root) but I
don't know whether that's really sufficient.
Ben.
> When logging an inode, at tree-log.c:copy_items(), if we call
> btrfs_next_leaf() at the loop which checks for the need to log holes, we
> need to make sure copy_items() returns the value 1 to its caller and
> not 0 (on success). This is because the path the caller passed was
> released and is now different from what is was before, and the caller
> expects a return value of 0 to mean both success and that the path
> has not changed, while a return value of 1 means both success and
> signals the caller that it can not reuse the path, it has to perform
> another tree search.
>
> Even though this is a case that should not be triggered on normal
> circumstances or very rare at least, its consequences can be very
> unpredictable (especially when replaying a log tree).
>
> Fixes: 16e7549f045d ("Btrfs: incompatible format change to remove hole
> extents")
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
> @@ -3835,6 +3835,7 @@ fill_holes:
> ASSERT(ret == 0);
> src = src_path->nodes[0];
> i = 0;
> + need_find_last_extent = true;
> }
>
> btrfs_item_key_to_cpu(src, &key, i);
--
Ben Hutchings, Software Developer Codethink Ltd
https://www.codethink.co.uk/ Dale House, 35 Dale Street
Manchester, M1 2HF, United Kingdom
