All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@suse.cz>
To: "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferroin7@gmail.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: loop subsystem corrupted after mounting multiple btrfs sub-volumes
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 21:37:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56D0B782.20606@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56D0B007.2050106@gmail.com>

On Feb 26, 2016 at 21:05 Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

> It's kind of interesting, but I can't reproduce _any_ of this behavior
> with either ext4 or BTRFS when I manually set up the loop devices and
> point mount(8) at those instead of using -o loop on a file. That really
> seems to indicate that this is caused by something mount(8) is doing
> when it's calling losetup.

Behavior of "-oloop" is more similar to "losetup -f /fs.img"? than to
"losetup /dev/loop0 /fs.img".

Anyway, I can reproduce without -oloop:
# losetup /dev/loop0 /btrfs.img
# mount /dev/loop0 /mnt/1
# grep /mnt /proc/self/mountinfo
107 59 0:59 /d0/dd0/ddd0/s1/d1/dd1/ddd1/s2 /mnt/1 rw,relatime shared:45 - btrfs /dev/loop0 rw,space_cache,subvolid=257,subvol=/d0/dd0/ddd0/s1/d1/dd1/ddd1/s2
# losetup /dev/loop1 /btrfs.img
# mount -osubvol=/ /dev/loop1 /mnt/2
# grep /mnt /proc/self/mountinfo
107 59 0:59 /d0/dd0/ddd0/s1/d1/dd1/ddd1/s2 /mnt/1 rw,relatime shared:45 - btrfs /dev/loop1 rw,space_cache,subvolid=257,subvol=/d0/dd0/ddd0/s1/d1/dd1/ddd1/s2
108 59 0:59 / /mnt/2 rw,relatime shared:48 - btrfs /dev/loop1 rw,space_cache,subvolid=5,subvol=/
# uname -a
Linux oct 4.4.1-1-default #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Feb 15 11:03:27 UTC 2016 (6398c2d) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

(Note that the system was freshly rebooted. After other experiments,
the second line of mountinfo can be missing completely.)

>> 2) mount(2) called after the reproducer returns OK but does nothing.
>>
> OK, we've determined that mount(2) is misbehaving.  That doesn't change
> the fact that mount(8) is triggering this, and therefore should itself
> be corrected.

> Assume that mount(2) gets fixed so it doesn't lose it's
> mind and /proc/self/mountinfo doesn't change.  There will still be
> issues resulting from mount(8)'s behavior:
> 1. BTRFS will lose it's mind and corrupt data when using a multi-device
> filesystem (due to the problems with duplicate FS UUID's).
> 2. XFS might have similar issues to 1 when using metadata checksumming,
> although it's more likely that it won't allow the second mount to succeed.
> 3. Most other filesystems will likely end up corrupting data.

Do I understand, that you are saying:

Yes, mounting multiple loop devices associated with one file is a
legitimate use, but mount(8) should never do it, because it has other
ugly side effects?

OK, it looks like a next task for mount(8) to fix.

-- 
Best Regards / S pozdravem,

Stanislav Brabec
software developer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SUSE LINUX, s. r. o.                         e-mail: sbrabec@suse.com
Lihovarská 1060/12                            tel: +49 911 7405384547
190 00 Praha 9                                 fax:  +420 284 084 001
Czech Republic                                    http://www.suse.cz/
PGP: 830B 40D5 9E05 35D8 5E27 6FA3 717C 209F A04F CD76

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-02-26 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-25 19:22 loop subsystem corrupted after mounting multiple btrfs sub-volumes Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 12:33 ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2016-02-26 15:50   ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 16:39     ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2016-02-26 17:07       ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 18:22         ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2016-02-26 19:31           ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 17:53       ` Al Viro
2016-02-26 19:12         ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 20:05           ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2016-02-26 20:30             ` Al Viro
2016-02-26 20:36               ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2016-02-26 21:00               ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 22:00                 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2016-02-29 14:56                   ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-03-01 13:44                     ` Ming Lei
2016-04-12 18:38               ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 20:37             ` Stanislav Brabec [this message]
2016-02-26 21:03               ` Al Viro
2016-02-26 21:36                 ` Stanislav Brabec
2016-02-26 21:45                   ` Al Viro
2016-02-29 13:11                     ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn

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=56D0B782.20606@suse.cz \
    --to=sbrabec@suse.cz \
    --cc=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    /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 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.