[PATCH 7.1 050/271] btrfs: initialize inode mapping flags for cached inodes

Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.patches,org.kernel.vger.stable
Message-ID <[email protected]>
7.1-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]>

[ Upstream commit 0ef349734a93227b45f65fc50a3311d1cc5f03e9 ]

[BUG]
When running generic/795 with 8K block size, 4K page size, the test
always fails, triggering some ASSERT()s related to folio size:

  795 (241074): drop_caches: 3
  assertion failed: IS_ALIGNED(start, blocksize) && IS_ALIGNED(end + 1, blocksize), in extent_io.c:1404 (blocksize=8192 root=262 ino=258 start=16826368 end=16830463 mapping min order=0)
  ------------[ cut here ]------------
  kernel BUG at extent_io.c:1404!
  Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
  CPU: 8 UID: 0 PID: 241105 Comm: fsstress Tainted: G           OE       7.2.0-rc5-custom+ #442 PREEMPT(full)  f4bfb352566f3949f29c233ce6f735050a03b245
  Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE
  Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS unknown 02/02/2022
  RIP: 0010:assert_folio_range.cold+0x3d/0x3f [btrfs]
  Call Trace:
   <TASK>
   btrfs_read_folio+0x9e/0x170 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3]
   prepare_one_folio.constprop.0+0x104/0x2a0 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3]
   btrfs_buffered_write+0x285/0xa50 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3]
   btrfs_do_write_iter+0x1aa/0x210 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3]
   iter_file_splice_write+0x31a/0x540
   direct_splice_actor+0x53/0x170
   splice_direct_to_actor+0xe9/0x240
   do_splice_direct+0x76/0xb0
   vfs_copy_file_range+0x1fd/0x630
   __x64_sys_copy_file_range+0xf9/0x220
   do_syscall_64+0xe1/0x790
   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
   </TASK>
  ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---

The ASSERT() itself is added by a later patch.
The crash is triggered with that new debug patch, and without this fix.

[CAUSE]
In the above case, the start 16826368 is properly 8K aligned, but the
end (16830463 + 1) is not 8K aligned.
Furthermore the mapping's minimal folio order is 0, not the expected 1
for 8K block size with 4K page size.

So this means some inodes do not have btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order()
called on it.

The missing btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() call happens for cached
inodes, through the following events:

- btrfs_create_new_inode() called for inode X
  Which properly sets minimal folio order for the VFS inode.

- btrfs_update_inode() called for inode X
  Which calls btrfs_delayed_update_inode() to create a delayed_node
  into root->delayed_nodes xarray.

- Drop cache/memory pressure, evicting in-memory inode X
  Which evicted the inode X, but delayed_node is still in
  root->delayed_nodes for future reuse.

- btrfs_iget() for inode X called again

  btrfs_iget()
  |- btrfs_iget_locked()
  |  |- iget5_locked_rcu()
  |     Which creates a new vfs_inode for btrfs, whose mapping still
  |     has the minimal order as 0.
  |
  |- btrfs_read_locked_inode()
     |- btrfs_fill_inode()
     |  |- btrfs_get_delayed_node()
     |     Which found out the previous node, and use that delayed
     |     node to initialize the new inode.
     |
     |- filled = true;
     |- if (filled) goto cache_index;
        Which skips the btrfs_update_inode_mapping_flags() and
	btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() calls.
	So the inode still has minimal folio order set as 0, not
	the required 1.

Thus later page cache read will get a folio whose size is smaller than
block size, as the mapping has its minimal folio order set as 0 not 1,
then trigger the ASSERT().

[FIX]
Move the btrfs_update_inode_mapping_flags() and
btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() calls under cache_index label,
so that the mapping flags and minimal folio order is always set
no matter if we have a cached inode.

Assisted-by: LLM (analysis)
Fixes: ecde48a1a6b3 ("btrfs: expose per-inode stable writes flag")
Fixes: cc38d178ff33 ("btrfs: enable large data folio support under CONFIG_BTRFS_EXPERIMENTAL")
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
---
 fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index a953d47eb2dd5..1271be0fbfcfa 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -4167,10 +4167,11 @@ static int btrfs_read_locked_inode(struct btrfs_inode *inode, struct btrfs_path
 
 	btrfs_inode_split_flags(btrfs_inode_flags(leaf, inode_item),
 				&inode->flags, &inode->ro_flags);
+
+cache_index:
 	btrfs_update_inode_mapping_flags(inode);
 	btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order(inode);
 
-cache_index:
 	/*
 	 * If we were modified in the current generation and evicted from memory
 	 * and then re-read we need to do a full sync since we don't have any
-- 
2.53.0
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.