* [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-04-28 2:49 ` Chao Yu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-04-28 2:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jaegeuk Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, linux-kernel, Chao Yu, stable, Ming Yan, Chao Yu As Yanming reported in bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. The kernel message is shown below: kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! Call Trace: evict+0x282/0x4e0 __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 dput+0x2dd/0x720 do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline data inode in sanity_check_inode(). Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> --- fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) */ static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) { + /* + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not + * been synchronized to inmem fields. + */ + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) + return true; return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || f2fs_compressed_file(inode); } diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) } } - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); -- 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-04-28 2:49 ` Chao Yu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-04-28 2:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jaegeuk; +Cc: linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel, Ming Yan As Yanming reported in bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. The kernel message is shown below: kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! Call Trace: evict+0x282/0x4e0 __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 dput+0x2dd/0x720 do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline data inode in sanity_check_inode(). Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> --- fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) */ static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) { + /* + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not + * been synchronized to inmem fields. + */ + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) + return true; return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || f2fs_compressed_file(inode); } diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) } } - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); -- 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-04-28 2:49 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu @ 2022-05-04 21:28 ` Jaegeuk Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-04 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, linux-kernel, stable, Ming Yan, Chao Yu On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > The kernel message is shown below: > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > Call Trace: > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > --- > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > */ > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > { > + /* > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > + */ > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > + return true; > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > } > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > } > } > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > -- > 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-04 21:28 ` Jaegeuk Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-04 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > The kernel message is shown below: > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > Call Trace: > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > --- > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > */ > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > { > + /* > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > + */ > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > + return true; > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > } > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > } > } > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > -- > 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-05-04 21:28 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-05 2:49 ` Chao Yu -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-05-05 2:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaegeuk Kim; +Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, linux-kernel, stable, Ming Yan, Chao Yu On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: >> As Yanming reported in bugzilla: >> >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >> >> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. >> >> The kernel message is shown below: >> >> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! >> Call Trace: >> evict+0x282/0x4e0 >> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 >> dput+0x2dd/0x720 >> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 >> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 >> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 >> >> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted >> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), >> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then >> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). >> >> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline >> data inode in sanity_check_inode(). >> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> >> --- >> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ >> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) >> */ >> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) >> { >> + /* >> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not >> + * been synchronized to inmem fields. >> + */ >> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || >> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) >> + return true; >> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || >> f2fs_compressed_file(inode); >> } >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) >> } >> } >> >> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && >> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { >> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, file should not be set as atomic one, right? I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you please provide me detail of the testcase? Thanks, > >> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); >> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", >> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); >> -- >> 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-05 2:49 ` Chao Yu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-05-05 2:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaegeuk Kim; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: >> As Yanming reported in bugzilla: >> >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >> >> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. >> >> The kernel message is shown below: >> >> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! >> Call Trace: >> evict+0x282/0x4e0 >> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 >> dput+0x2dd/0x720 >> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 >> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 >> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 >> >> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted >> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), >> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then >> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). >> >> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline >> data inode in sanity_check_inode(). >> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> >> --- >> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ >> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) >> */ >> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) >> { >> + /* >> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not >> + * been synchronized to inmem fields. >> + */ >> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || >> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) >> + return true; >> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || >> f2fs_compressed_file(inode); >> } >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) >> } >> } >> >> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && >> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { >> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, file should not be set as atomic one, right? I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you please provide me detail of the testcase? Thanks, > >> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); >> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", >> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); >> -- >> 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-05-05 2:49 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu @ 2022-05-05 3:31 ` Jaegeuk Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-05 3:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, linux-kernel, stable, Ming Yan, Chao Yu On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > > > > > The kernel message is shown below: > > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > > > Call Trace: > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > --- > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > */ > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > { > > > + /* > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > + */ > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > + return true; > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > } > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > } > > > } > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, > file should not be set as atomic one, right? > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you > please provide me detail of the testcase? I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > Thanks, > > > > > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > > > f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > > __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-05 3:31 ` Jaegeuk Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-05 3:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > > > > > The kernel message is shown below: > > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > > > Call Trace: > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > --- > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > */ > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > { > > > + /* > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > + */ > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > + return true; > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > } > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > } > > > } > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, > file should not be set as atomic one, right? > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you > please provide me detail of the testcase? I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > Thanks, > > > > > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > > > f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > > __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-05-05 3:31 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-05 14:33 ` Chao Yu -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-05-05 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaegeuk Kim; +Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, linux-kernel, stable, Ming Yan, Chao Yu On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla: >>>> >>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >>>> >>>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. >>>> >>>> The kernel message is shown below: >>>> >>>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! >>>> Call Trace: >>>> evict+0x282/0x4e0 >>>> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 >>>> dput+0x2dd/0x720 >>>> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 >>>> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 >>>> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 >>>> >>>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted >>>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), >>>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then >>>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). >>>> >>>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline >>>> data inode in sanity_check_inode(). >>>> >>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> >>>> --- >>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ >>>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- >>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>> */ >>>> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) >>>> { >>>> + /* >>>> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not >>>> + * been synchronized to inmem fields. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || >>>> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) >>>> + return true; >>>> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || >>>> f2fs_compressed_file(inode); >>>> } >>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) >>>> } >>>> } >>>> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && >>>> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { >>>> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { >>> >>> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. >> >> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, >> file should not be set as atomic one, right? >> >> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you >> please provide me detail of the testcase? > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error > messages resulting in open failures of database files. Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> --- fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) */ static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) { + /* + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not + * been synchronized to inmem fields. + */ + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) + return true; return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || f2fs_compressed_file(inode); } diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) } } - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); return false; } -- 2.32.0 > >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>>> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); >>>> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", >>>> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); >>>> -- >>>> 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-05 14:33 ` Chao Yu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-05-05 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaegeuk Kim; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla: >>>> >>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >>>> >>>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. >>>> >>>> The kernel message is shown below: >>>> >>>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! >>>> Call Trace: >>>> evict+0x282/0x4e0 >>>> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 >>>> dput+0x2dd/0x720 >>>> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 >>>> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 >>>> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 >>>> >>>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted >>>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), >>>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then >>>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). >>>> >>>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline >>>> data inode in sanity_check_inode(). >>>> >>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> >>>> --- >>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ >>>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- >>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>> */ >>>> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) >>>> { >>>> + /* >>>> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not >>>> + * been synchronized to inmem fields. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || >>>> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) >>>> + return true; >>>> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || >>>> f2fs_compressed_file(inode); >>>> } >>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) >>>> } >>>> } >>>> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && >>>> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { >>>> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { >>> >>> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. >> >> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, >> file should not be set as atomic one, right? >> >> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you >> please provide me detail of the testcase? > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error > messages resulting in open failures of database files. Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> --- fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) */ static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) { + /* + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not + * been synchronized to inmem fields. + */ + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) + return true; return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || f2fs_compressed_file(inode); } diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) } } - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); return false; } -- 2.32.0 > >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>>> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); >>>> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", >>>> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); >>>> -- >>>> 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-05-05 14:33 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu @ 2022-05-08 13:52 ` Chao Yu -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-05-08 13:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaegeuk Kim; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel Ping, On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >> On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: >>> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla: >>>>> >>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >>>>> >>>>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. >>>>> >>>>> The kernel message is shown below: >>>>> >>>>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! >>>>> Call Trace: >>>>> evict+0x282/0x4e0 >>>>> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 >>>>> dput+0x2dd/0x720 >>>>> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 >>>>> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 >>>>> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 >>>>> >>>>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted >>>>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), >>>>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then >>>>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). >>>>> >>>>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline >>>>> data inode in sanity_check_inode(). >>>>> >>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>>>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ >>>>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- >>>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>>> */ >>>>> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) >>>>> { >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not >>>>> + * been synchronized to inmem fields. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || >>>>> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) >>>>> + return true; >>>>> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || >>>>> f2fs_compressed_file(inode); >>>>> } >>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && >>>>> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { >>>>> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { >>>> >>>> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. >>> >>> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, >>> file should not be set as atomic one, right? >>> >>> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you >>> please provide me detail of the testcase? >> >> I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error >> messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? > > From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > --- > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > */ > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > { > + /* > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > + */ > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > + return true; > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > } > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > } > } > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); > return false; > } > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-08 13:52 ` Chao Yu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Chao Yu @ 2022-05-08 13:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaegeuk Kim; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel Ping, On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >> On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: >>> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla: >>>>> >>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 >>>>> >>>>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. >>>>> >>>>> The kernel message is shown below: >>>>> >>>>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! >>>>> Call Trace: >>>>> evict+0x282/0x4e0 >>>>> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 >>>>> dput+0x2dd/0x720 >>>>> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 >>>>> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 >>>>> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 >>>>> >>>>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted >>>>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), >>>>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then >>>>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). >>>>> >>>>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline >>>>> data inode in sanity_check_inode(). >>>>> >>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>>>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ >>>>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- >>>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>>>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>>> */ >>>>> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) >>>>> { >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not >>>>> + * been synchronized to inmem fields. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || >>>>> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) >>>>> + return true; >>>>> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || >>>>> f2fs_compressed_file(inode); >>>>> } >>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>>>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && >>>>> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { >>>>> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { >>>> >>>> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. >>> >>> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, >>> file should not be set as atomic one, right? >>> >>> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you >>> please provide me detail of the testcase? >> >> I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error >> messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? > > From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > --- > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > */ > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > { > + /* > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > + */ > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > + return true; > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > } > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > } > } > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); > return false; > } > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-05-08 13:52 ` Chao Yu @ 2022-05-09 16:57 ` Jaegeuk Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-09 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 05/08, Chao Yu wrote: > Ping, This is in my TODO list, but will take some time. Sorry. > > On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote: > > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > > > > > > > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > > > > > > > > > > > The kernel message is shown below: > > > > > > > > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > > > > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > > > > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > > > > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > > > > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > > > > > > > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > > > > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > > > > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > > > > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > > > > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > > > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > */ > > > > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > { > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > > > > + return true; > > > > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > > > > } > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > > > > } > > > > > > } > > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > > > > > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > > > > > > > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, > > > > file should not be set as atomic one, right? > > > > > > > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you > > > > please provide me detail of the testcase? > > > > > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error > > > messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > > > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? > > > > From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> > > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > --- > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > */ > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > { > > + /* > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > + */ > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > + return true; > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > } > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > } > > } > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, > > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), > > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), > > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); > > return false; > > } > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-09 16:57 ` Jaegeuk Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-09 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 05/08, Chao Yu wrote: > Ping, This is in my TODO list, but will take some time. Sorry. > > On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote: > > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > > > > > > > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > > > > > > > > > > > The kernel message is shown below: > > > > > > > > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > > > > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > > > > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > > > > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > > > > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > > > > > > > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > > > > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > > > > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > > > > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > > > > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > > > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > */ > > > > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > { > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > > > > + return true; > > > > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > > > > } > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > > > > } > > > > > > } > > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > > > > > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > > > > > > > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, > > > > file should not be set as atomic one, right? > > > > > > > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you > > > > please provide me detail of the testcase? > > > > > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error > > > messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > > > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? > > > > From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> > > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > --- > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > */ > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > { > > + /* > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > + */ > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > + return true; > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > } > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > } > > } > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, > > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), > > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), > > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); > > return false; > > } > > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-05-09 16:57 ` Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Jaegeuk Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-13 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 05/09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/08, Chao Yu wrote: > > Ping, > > This is in my TODO list, but will take some time. Sorry. Got this. sanity_check_inode: inode (ino=1125d, mode=41471) reason(0, 98, 3452, 4, 0, 0) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix Ok, this is a symlink, which was encrypted having inline_data. > > > > > On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote: > > > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The kernel message is shown below: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > > > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > > > > > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > > > > > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > > > > > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > > > > > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > > > > > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > > > > > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > > > > > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > > > > > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > > > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > > > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > > > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > > > > > + return true; > > > > > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > > > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > > > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > > > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > > > > > > > > > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, > > > > > file should not be set as atomic one, right? > > > > > > > > > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you > > > > > please provide me detail of the testcase? > > > > > > > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error > > > > messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > > > > > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? > > > > > > From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> > > > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > --- > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- > > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > */ > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > { > > > + /* > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > + */ > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > + return true; > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > } > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > } > > > } > > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > > > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > > > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, > > > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), > > > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), > > > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); > > > return false; > > > } > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Jaegeuk Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-13 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 05/09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/08, Chao Yu wrote: > > Ping, > > This is in my TODO list, but will take some time. Sorry. Got this. sanity_check_inode: inode (ino=1125d, mode=41471) reason(0, 98, 3452, 4, 0, 0) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix Ok, this is a symlink, which was encrypted having inline_data. > > > > > On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote: > > > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > > > > > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The kernel message is shown below: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > > > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > > > > > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > > > > > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > > > > > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > > > > > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > > > > > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > > > > > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > > > > > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > > > > > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > > > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > > > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > > > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > > > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > > > > > + return true; > > > > > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > > > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > > > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > > > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > > > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix. > > > > > > > > > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization, > > > > > file should not be set as atomic one, right? > > > > > > > > > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you > > > > > please provide me detail of the testcase? > > > > > > > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error > > > > messages resulting in open failures of database files. > > > > > > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log? > > > > > > From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> > > > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > --- > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++---- > > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > > > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > > > */ > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > > > { > > > + /* > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > > > + */ > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > > > + return true; > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > > > } > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644 > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > > > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > } > > > } > > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { > > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > > > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > > > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > > > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode, > > > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode), > > > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode), > > > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode), > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL); > > > return false; > > > } > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode 2022-04-28 2:49 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu @ 2022-05-13 21:07 ` Jaegeuk Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-13 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, linux-kernel, stable, Ming Yan, Chao Yu On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > The kernel message is shown below: > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > Call Trace: > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > --- > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > */ > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > { > + /* > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > + */ > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > + return true; > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > } > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > } > } > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { BTW, why can't we just check the above on-disk fields here only? > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > -- > 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode @ 2022-05-13 21:07 ` Jaegeuk Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jaegeuk Kim @ 2022-05-13 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chao Yu; +Cc: Ming Yan, linux-kernel, stable, linux-f2fs-devel On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote: > As Yanming reported in bugzilla: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895 > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17. > > The kernel message is shown below: > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611! > Call Trace: > evict+0x282/0x4e0 > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0 > dput+0x2dd/0x720 > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970 > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90 > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(), > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode(). > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline > data inode in sanity_check_inode(). > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Reported-by: Ming Yan <yanming@tju.edu.cn> > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > --- > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++ > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +-- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode) > */ > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode) > { > + /* > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not > + * been synchronized to inmem fields. > + */ > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) || > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL) > + return true; > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) || > f2fs_compressed_file(inode); > } > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > } > } > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) { > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) { BTW, why can't we just check the above on-disk fields here only? > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK); > f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix", > __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode); > -- > 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-05-13 21:35 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-04-28 2:49 [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode Chao Yu 2022-04-28 2:49 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu 2022-05-04 21:28 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-04 21:28 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-05 2:49 ` Chao Yu 2022-05-05 2:49 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu 2022-05-05 3:31 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-05 3:31 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-05 14:33 ` Chao Yu 2022-05-05 14:33 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu 2022-05-08 13:52 ` Chao Yu 2022-05-08 13:52 ` Chao Yu 2022-05-09 16:57 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-09 16:57 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-13 21:07 ` Jaegeuk Kim 2022-05-13 21:07 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.