All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: [PATCH] xfs: recheck appropriateness of map_shared lock
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 17:24:58 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y8ib6ls32e/pJezE@magnolia> (raw)

From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

While fuzzing the data fork extent count on a btree-format directory
with xfs/375, I observed the following (excerpted) splat:

XFS: Assertion failed: xfs_isilocked(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL), file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c, line: 1208
------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 43192 at fs/xfs/xfs_message.c:104 assfail+0x46/0x4a [xfs]
Call Trace:
 <TASK>
 xfs_iread_extents+0x1af/0x210 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xchk_dir_walk+0xb8/0x190 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xchk_parent_count_parent_dentries+0x41/0x80 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xchk_parent_validate+0x199/0x2e0 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xchk_parent+0xdf/0x130 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xfs_scrub_metadata+0x2b8/0x730 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xfs_scrubv_metadata+0x38b/0x4d0 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xfs_ioc_scrubv_metadata+0x111/0x160 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 xfs_file_ioctl+0x367/0xf50 [xfs 09f66509ece4938760fac7de64732a0cbd3e39cd]
 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x82/0xa0
 do_syscall_64+0x2b/0x80
 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0

The cause of this is a race condition in xfs_ilock_data_map_shared,
which performs an unlocked access to the data fork to guess which lock
mode it needs:

Thread 0                          Thread 1

xfs_need_iread_extents
<observe no iext tree>
xfs_ilock(..., ILOCK_EXCL)
xfs_iread_extents
<observe no iext tree>
<check ILOCK_EXCL>
<load bmbt extents into iext>
<notice iext size doesn't
 match nextents>
                                  xfs_need_iread_extents
                                  <observe iext tree>
                                  xfs_ilock(..., ILOCK_SHARED)
<tear down iext tree>
xfs_iunlock(..., ILOCK_EXCL)
                                  xfs_iread_extents
                                  <observe no iext tree>
                                  <check ILOCK_EXCL>
                                  *BOOM*

mitigate this race by having thread 1 to recheck xfs_need_iread_extents
after taking the shared ILOCK.  If the iext tree isn't present, then we
need to upgrade to the exclusive ILOCK to try to load the bmbt.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
index d354ea2b74f9..6ce1e0e9f256 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
@@ -117,6 +117,20 @@ xfs_ilock_data_map_shared(
 	if (xfs_need_iread_extents(&ip->i_df))
 		lock_mode = XFS_ILOCK_EXCL;
 	xfs_ilock(ip, lock_mode);
+
+	/*
+	 * It's possible that the unlocked access of the data fork to determine
+	 * the lock mode could have raced with another thread that was failing
+	 * to load the bmbt but hadn't yet torn down the iext tree.  Recheck
+	 * the lock mode and upgrade to an exclusive lock if we need to.
+	 */
+	if (lock_mode == XFS_ILOCK_SHARED &&
+	    xfs_need_iread_extents(&ip->i_df)) {
+		xfs_iunlock(ip, lock_mode);
+		lock_mode = XFS_ILOCK_EXCL;
+		xfs_ilock(ip, lock_mode);
+	}
+
 	return lock_mode;
 }
 
@@ -129,6 +143,21 @@ xfs_ilock_attr_map_shared(
 	if (xfs_inode_has_attr_fork(ip) && xfs_need_iread_extents(&ip->i_af))
 		lock_mode = XFS_ILOCK_EXCL;
 	xfs_ilock(ip, lock_mode);
+
+	/*
+	 * It's possible that the unlocked access of the attr fork to determine
+	 * the lock mode could have raced with another thread that was failing
+	 * to load the bmbt but hadn't yet torn down the iext tree.  Recheck
+	 * the lock mode and upgrade to an exclusive lock if we need to.
+	 */
+	if (lock_mode == XFS_ILOCK_SHARED &&
+	    xfs_inode_has_attr_fork(ip) &&
+	    xfs_need_iread_extents(&ip->i_af)) {
+		xfs_iunlock(ip, lock_mode);
+		lock_mode = XFS_ILOCK_EXCL;
+		xfs_ilock(ip, lock_mode);
+	}
+
 	return lock_mode;
 }
 

             reply	other threads:[~2023-01-19  1:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-19  1:24 Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2023-01-19  5:14 ` [PATCH] xfs: recheck appropriateness of map_shared lock Dave Chinner
2023-01-19 18:39   ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-19 20:34     ` Dave Chinner
2023-02-28 20:08   ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-01-19 18:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-11  1:05   ` Darrick J. Wong

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=Y8ib6ls32e/pJezE@magnolia \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.