linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] btrfs: delayed-inode: Use spinlock to protect btrfs_inode::delayed_node
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:22:59 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2f4142fc-0b1c-0308-e228-d904bf6b395b@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180919065958.21153-1-wqu@suse.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5201 bytes --]



On 2018/9/19 下午2:59, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> In the following case, we could trigger a use-after-free bug:
> 
>          CPU0                    |               CPU1
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> btrfs_remove_delayed_node        | btrfs_get_delayed_node
> |- delayed_node =                | |- node = btrfs_inode->delayed_node;
> |    btrfs_inode->delayed_node   | |
> |- btrfs_release_delaedy_node()  | |
>    |- ref_count_dev_and_test()   | |
>    |- kmem_cache_free()          | |
>       Now delayed node is freed  | |
>                                  | |- refcount_inc(&node->refs)
> 
> In that case sine delayed_node is using kmem cache, such use-after-free
> bug won't directly cause problem, but could leads to corrupted data
> structure of other kmem cache user.
> 
> Fix it by adding btrfs_inode::delayed_node_lock to protect such
> operation.
> 
> Reported-by: sunny.s.zhang <sunny.s.zhang@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
> ---
> Please don't merge this patch yet.

False alert.

The performance degradation is a false alert, and it's pretty awkward.

Before this test run, I refilled TEST_DEV with a special file layout
(for my qgroup balance test) to increase balance/qgroup overhead.
And the file layout also turns out to be pretty heavy for btrfs check,
which makes the test time increase.

Since it's a false alert, the RFC tag is no longer needed.

Thanks,
Qu

> 
> The patch caused random slow down for a lot of quick test cases.
> Old tests can be executed in 1s or so now randomly needs near 20s.
> 
> It looks like the spin_lock() with root->inode_lock hold is causing the
> problem but I can't see what's going wrong.
> As the operation done with @delayed_node_lock hold is literatly tiny.
> 
> Any comment on this is welcomed.
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/btrfs_inode.h   |  2 ++
>  fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
>  fs/btrfs/inode.c         |  1 +
>  3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/btrfs_inode.h b/fs/btrfs/btrfs_inode.h
> index 1343ac57b438..c2f054223588 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/btrfs_inode.h
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/btrfs_inode.h
> @@ -175,6 +175,8 @@ struct btrfs_inode {
>  	 */
>  	unsigned defrag_compress;
>  
> +	/* lock for grabbing/freeing @delayed_node */
> +	spinlock_t delayed_node_lock;
>  	struct btrfs_delayed_node *delayed_node;
>  
>  	/* File creation time. */
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c
> index f51b509f2d9b..16c405e54930 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c
> @@ -68,19 +68,24 @@ static struct btrfs_delayed_node *btrfs_get_delayed_node(
>  	u64 ino = btrfs_ino(btrfs_inode);
>  	struct btrfs_delayed_node *node;
>  
> -	node = READ_ONCE(btrfs_inode->delayed_node);
> +	spin_lock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
> +	node = btrfs_inode->delayed_node;
>  	if (node) {
>  		refcount_inc(&node->refs);
> +		spin_unlock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  		return node;
>  	}
> +	spin_unlock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  
>  	spin_lock(&root->inode_lock);
>  	node = radix_tree_lookup(&root->delayed_nodes_tree, ino);
>  
>  	if (node) {
> +		spin_lock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  		if (btrfs_inode->delayed_node) {
>  			refcount_inc(&node->refs);	/* can be accessed */
>  			BUG_ON(btrfs_inode->delayed_node != node);
> +			spin_unlock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  			spin_unlock(&root->inode_lock);
>  			return node;
>  		}
> @@ -108,6 +113,7 @@ static struct btrfs_delayed_node *btrfs_get_delayed_node(
>  			node = NULL;
>  		}
>  
> +		spin_unlock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  		spin_unlock(&root->inode_lock);
>  		return node;
>  	}
> @@ -152,7 +158,9 @@ static struct btrfs_delayed_node *btrfs_get_or_create_delayed_node(
>  		radix_tree_preload_end();
>  		goto again;
>  	}
> +	spin_lock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  	btrfs_inode->delayed_node = node;
> +	spin_unlock(&btrfs_inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  	spin_unlock(&root->inode_lock);
>  	radix_tree_preload_end();
>  
> @@ -1279,11 +1287,15 @@ void btrfs_remove_delayed_node(struct btrfs_inode *inode)
>  {
>  	struct btrfs_delayed_node *delayed_node;
>  
> -	delayed_node = READ_ONCE(inode->delayed_node);
> -	if (!delayed_node)
> +	spin_lock(&inode->delayed_node_lock);
> +	delayed_node = inode->delayed_node;
> +	if (!delayed_node) {
> +		spin_unlock(&inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  		return;
> +	}
>  
>  	inode->delayed_node = NULL;
> +	spin_unlock(&inode->delayed_node_lock);
>  	btrfs_release_delayed_node(delayed_node);
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> index 9357a19d2bff..f438be5fecaf 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> @@ -9177,6 +9177,7 @@ struct inode *btrfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
>  	ei->last_log_commit = 0;
>  
>  	spin_lock_init(&ei->lock);
> +	spin_lock_init(&ei->delayed_node_lock);
>  	ei->outstanding_extents = 0;
>  	if (sb->s_magic != BTRFS_TEST_MAGIC)
>  		btrfs_init_metadata_block_rsv(fs_info, &ei->block_rsv,
> 


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-19 12:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-19  6:59 [PATCH RFC] btrfs: delayed-inode: Use spinlock to protect btrfs_inode::delayed_node Qu Wenruo
2018-09-19  7:22 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2018-09-19 11:06 ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-09-21 13:13 ` David Sterba

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=2f4142fc-0b1c-0308-e228-d904bf6b395b@gmx.com \
    --to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wqu@suse.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).