On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 12:51:15AM +0400, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
> If memory allocation in ext4_mb_new_group_pa() is failed,
> it returns error code, ext4_mb_new_preallocation() propages it,
> but ext4_mb_new_blocks() ignores it.
>
> An observed result was:
> - allocation fail means ext4_mb_new_group_pa() does not update
> ext4_allocation_context;
> - ext4_mb_new_blocks() sets ext4_allocation_request->len (ar->len =
> ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len;)
> to number of blocks preallocated (512) instead of number of blocks
> requested (1);
> - that activates update cycle in ext4_splice_branch():
> for (i = 1; i < blks; i++) <-- blks is 512 instead of 1 here
> *(where->p + i) = cpu_to_le32(current_block++);
> - it iterates 511 times and corrupts a chunk of memory including inode
> structure;
> - page fault happens at EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb) in ext4_mark_inode_dirty();
> - system hangs with 'scheduling while atomic' BUG.
>
> The patch implements a check for ext4_mb_new_preallocation() error code
> and handles its failure as if ext4_mb_regular_allocator() fails.
>
> Found by Linux File System Verification project (linuxtesting.org).
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Khoroshilov <[email protected]>
Hi Alexey,
Thanks for reporting this bug, and proposing a fix. I've restructured
the patch slightly to make the flow of control slightly easier to
follow, and more consistent with the coding style in ext4.
Thanks again!
- Ted
>From fa4f073ab981d4aabb61f9262405af53072a0d8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alexey Khoroshilov <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:15:34 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] ext4: implement error handling of
ext4_mb_new_preallocation()
If memory allocation in ext4_mb_new_group_pa() is failed,
it returns error code, ext4_mb_new_preallocation() propages it,
but ext4_mb_new_blocks() ignores it.
An observed result was:
- allocation fail means ext4_mb_new_group_pa() does not update
ext4_allocation_context;
- ext4_mb_new_blocks() sets ext4_allocation_request->len (ar->len =
ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len;) to number of blocks preallocated (512) instead
of number of blocks requested (1);
- that activates update cycle in ext4_splice_branch():
for (i = 1; i < blks; i++) <-- blks is 512 instead of 1 here
*(where->p + i) = cpu_to_le32(current_block++);
- it iterates 511 times and corrupts a chunk of memory including inode
structure;
- page fault happens at EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb) in ext4_mark_inode_dirty();
- system hangs with 'scheduling while atomic' BUG.
The patch implements a check for ext4_mb_new_preallocation() error
code and handles its failure as if ext4_mb_regular_allocator() fails.
Found by Linux File System Verification project (linuxtesting.org).
[ Patch restructed by tytso to make the flow of control easier to follow. ]
Signed-off-by: Alexey Khoroshilov <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 1a9c22b..a9ff5e5 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -4406,17 +4406,20 @@ ext4_fsblk_t ext4_mb_new_blocks(handle_t *handle,
repeat:
/* allocate space in core */
*errp = ext4_mb_regular_allocator(ac);
- if (*errp) {
- ext4_discard_allocated_blocks(ac);
- goto errout;
- }
+ if (*errp)
+ goto discard_and_exit;
/* as we've just preallocated more space than
- * user requested orinally, we store allocated
+ * user requested originally, we store allocated
* space in a special descriptor */
if (ac->ac_status == AC_STATUS_FOUND &&
- ac->ac_o_ex.fe_len < ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len)
- ext4_mb_new_preallocation(ac);
+ ac->ac_o_ex.fe_len < ac->ac_b_ex.fe_len)
+ *errp = ext4_mb_new_preallocation(ac);
+ if (*errp) {
+ discard_and_exit:
+ ext4_discard_allocated_blocks(ac);
+ goto errout;
+ }
}
if (likely(ac->ac_status == AC_STATUS_FOUND)) {
*errp = ext4_mb_mark_diskspace_used(ac, handle, reserv_clstrs);
--
1.7.12.rc0.22.gcdd159b
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
