[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 4/4] ocfs2: fix value of OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT

[Gang He <ghe@suse.com>]

Hi Guys,

On 7/3/2020 11:41 AM, Gang He wrote:
> Hi Joseph and All,
> 
> On 7/2/2020 10:13 PM, Joseph Qi wrote:
>> Hi Gang,
>>   From the call tree it seems has relation with steal slot.
>> Could you try the following patch in linux-next:
>> 88b4270f4999 ("ocfs2: change slot number type s16 to u16")
> When I delete the commit(9277f8 ocfs2: fix value of OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT),
> the problem (as below) does not happen again.
> I will try the patch(88b4270f4999 ocfs2: change slot number type s16 to
> u16), to see if which can help the commit 9277f8.
Apply the patch (88b4270f4999 ocfs2: change slot number type s16 to 
u16), the problem does not happen.
That means this patch fixed the patch (9277f8334ffc ocfs2: fix value of 
OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT).

Thanks
Gang

> 
> Thanks
> Gang
> 
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joseph
>>
>> On 2020/7/2 16:48, Gang He wrote:
>>> Hello Junxiao,
>>>
>>> Thank for your patches, which looks to fix the nfsd access problem.
>>> But the patches bring a new bug, like below,
>>>
>>> [  251.406698] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
>>> 0000565336a6bdf8
>>> [  251.406706] #PF error: [WRITE]
>>> [  251.406710] PGD 0 P4D 0
>>> [  251.406717] Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP PTI
>>> [  251.406724] CPU: 3 PID: 3758 Comm: mkdir Tainted: G           OE
>>> 5.0.6-1-default #1 openSUSE Tumbleweed (unreleased)
>>> [  251.406729] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996),
>>> BIOS rel-1.8.1-0-g4adadbd-20151112_172657-sheep25 04/01/2014
>>> [  251.406739] RIP: 0010:_raw_spin_lock+0xc/0x20
>>> [  251.406743] Code: 02 00 00 f0 0f c1 03 a9 ff 01 00 00 75 06 48 89 e8
>>> 5b 5d c3 48 89 df e8 a2 4f 87 ff eb f0 0f 1f 44 00 00 31 c0 ba 01 00 00
>>> 00 <f0> 0f b1 17 75 01 c3 89 c6 e8 76 3a 87 ff 66 90 c3 0f 1f 00 0f 1f
>>> [  251.406750] RSP: 0018:ffffb65401087bf0 EFLAGS: 00010246
>>> [  251.406755] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000565336a6bd70 RCX:
>>> 00000000ffffffff
>>> [  251.406759] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000009 RDI:
>>> 0000565336a6bdf8
>>> [  251.406763] RBP: 0000565336a6bdf8 R08: 0000000000000000 R09:
>>> 0000000000000000
>>> [  251.406767] R10: 0000000000000005 R11: ffff9d7ded1bb000 R12:
>>> ffff9d7e38c559d0
>>> [  251.406771] R13: ffff9d7e39354be8 R14: ffff9d7e393540c8 R15:
>>> 00000000ffffffff
>>> [  251.406777] FS:  00007f32d9e39c40(0000) GS:ffff9d7e3db80000(0000)
>>> knlGS:0000000000000000
>>> [  251.406782] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
>>> [  251.406788] CR2: 0000565336a6bdf8 CR3: 0000000076496000 CR4:
>>> 00000000000006e0
>>> [  251.406801] Call Trace:
>>> [  251.406824]  igrab+0x19/0x50
>>> [  251.406941]  ocfs2_get_system_file_inode+0x65/0x2e0 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.406980]  ? ocfs2_find_entry+0x354/0x7f0 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.407025]  ocfs2_reserve_suballoc_bits+0x3b/0x450 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.407070]  ocfs2_steal_resource+0x8d/0x100 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.407113]  ocfs2_reserve_new_inode+0x97/0x3d0 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.407154]  ocfs2_mknod+0x3a7/0xe70 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.407191]  ? __ocfs2_cluster_unlock.isra.47+0x24/0xd0 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.407231]  ocfs2_mkdir+0x33/0x120 [ocfs2]
>>> [  251.407239]  ? inode_permission+0xbe/0x180
>>> [  251.407244]  vfs_mkdir+0x102/0x1b0
>>> [  251.407250]  do_mkdirat+0xd9/0x100
>>> [  251.407258]  do_syscall_64+0x60/0x110
>>> [  251.407265]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>>> [  251.407271] RIP: 0033:0x7f32d9fbf307
>>> [  251.407276] Code: 1f 40 00 48 8b 05 91 eb 0c 00 64 c7 00 5f 00 00 00
>>> b8 ff ff ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 66 90 b8 53 00 00 00 0f
>>> 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 61 eb 0c 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
>>> [  251.407283] RSP: 002b:00007fff36999c98 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX:
>>> 0000000000000053
>>> [  251.407289] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fff3699b618 RCX:
>>> 00007f32d9fbf307
>>> [  251.407294] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00000000000001ff RDI:
>>> 00007fff3699b618
>>> [  251.407298] RBP: 00007fff3699b618 R08: 00000000000001ff R09:
>>> 000055a9fe8b2c00
>>>
>>> I feel the problem looks related to this patch.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Gang
>>>
>>> On 6/17/2020 2:38 AM, Junxiao Bi wrote:
>>>> >From ocfs2 disk layout, slot number is 16 bits, but in ocfs2 implemtation,
>>>> slot number is 32 bits, usually this will not cause any issue, because
>>>> slot number is converting from u16 to u32, but OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT was
>>>> defined as -1, when an invalid slot number from disk was got, it value
>>>> was (u16)-1, and it was converted to u32, then the following checking
>>>> in get_local_system_inode will be always skipped.
>>>>
>>>>     static struct inode **get_local_system_inode(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
>>>>                                                   int type,
>>>>                                                   u32 slot)
>>>>     {
>>>>     	BUG_ON(slot == OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT);
>>>> 	...
>>>>     }
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi@oracle.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>     fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_fs.h | 2 +-
>>>>     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_fs.h b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_fs.h
>>>> index 3fc99659ed09..19137c6d087b 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_fs.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_fs.h
>>>> @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@
>>>>     #define OCFS2_MAX_SLOTS			255
>>>>     
>>>>     /* Slot map indicator for an empty slot */
>>>> -#define OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT		-1
>>>> +#define OCFS2_INVALID_SLOT		((u16)-1)
>>>>     
>>>>     #define OCFS2_VOL_UUID_LEN		16
>>>>     #define OCFS2_MAX_VOL_LABEL_LEN		64
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
>>> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com
>>> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com
> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>