As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
The kernel message is shown below:
kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
Call Trace:
evict+0x282/0x4e0
__dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
dput+0x2dd/0x720
do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
__x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
data inode in sanity_check_inode().
Cc: [email protected]
Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
---
fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
+++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
@@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
*/
static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
{
+ /*
+ * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
+ * been synchronized to inmem fields.
+ */
+ if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
+ F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
+ return true;
return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
}
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
@@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
}
}
- if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
- (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
+ if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
__func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
--
2.25.1
On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
> As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
>
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
>
> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
>
> The kernel message is shown below:
>
> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
> Call Trace:
> evict+0x282/0x4e0
> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
> dput+0x2dd/0x720
> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
>
> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
>
> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
> data inode in sanity_check_inode().
>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> */
> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> {
> + /*
> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> + */
> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> + return true;
> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> }
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> }
> }
>
> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
> --
> 2.25.1
On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
>>>>
>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
>>>>
>>>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
>>>>
>>>> The kernel message is shown below:
>>>>
>>>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
>>>> Call Trace:
>>>> evict+0x282/0x4e0
>>>> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
>>>> dput+0x2dd/0x720
>>>> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
>>>> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
>>>> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
>>>>
>>>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
>>>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
>>>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
>>>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
>>>>
>>>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
>>>> data inode in sanity_check_inode().
>>>>
>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
>>>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
>>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
>>>> */
>>>> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
>>>> {
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
>>>> + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
>>>> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
>>>> + return true;
>>>> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
>>>> f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
>>>> }
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
>>>> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
>>>> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
>>>
>>> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
>>
>> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization,
>> file should not be set as atomic one, right?
>>
>> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you
>> please provide me detail of the testcase?
>
> I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error
> messages resulting in open failures of database files.
Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log?
From: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
---
fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++----
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
+++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
@@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
*/
static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
{
+ /*
+ * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
+ * been synchronized to inmem fields.
+ */
+ if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
+ F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
+ return true;
return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
}
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
@@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
}
}
- if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
- (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
+ if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
- f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
- __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
+ f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
+ __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode,
+ f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode),
+ i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode),
+ file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode),
+ F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL);
return false;
}
--
2.32.0
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>
>>>> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
>>>> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
>>>> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
>>>> --
>>>> 2.25.1
On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
>>
>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
>>
>> The kernel message is shown below:
>>
>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
>> Call Trace:
>> evict+0x282/0x4e0
>> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
>> dput+0x2dd/0x720
>> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
>> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
>> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
>>
>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
>>
>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
>> data inode in sanity_check_inode().
>>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
>> */
>> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
>> {
>> + /*
>> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
>> + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
>> + */
>> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
>> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
>> + return true;
>> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
>> f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
>> }
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
>> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
>> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
>
> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization,
file should not be set as atomic one, right?
I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you
please provide me detail of the testcase?
Thanks,
>
>> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
>> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
>> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
>> --
>> 2.25.1
On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
> > >
> > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
> > >
> > > The kernel message is shown below:
> > >
> > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
> > > Call Trace:
> > > evict+0x282/0x4e0
> > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
> > > dput+0x2dd/0x720
> > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
> > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
> > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
> > >
> > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
> > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
> > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
> > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
> > >
> > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
> > > data inode in sanity_check_inode().
> > >
> > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
> > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> > > */
> > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> > > {
> > > + /*
> > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> > > + */
> > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> > > + return true;
> > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> > > }
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> > > }
> > > }
> > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
> >
> > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
>
> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization,
> file should not be set as atomic one, right?
>
> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you
> please provide me detail of the testcase?
I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error
messages resulting in open failures of database files.
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> > > f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> > > __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
> > > --
> > > 2.25.1
Ping,
On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote:
>>> On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>>> On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>>> As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
>>>>>
>>>>> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
>>>>>
>>>>> The kernel message is shown below:
>>>>>
>>>>> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
>>>>> Call Trace:
>>>>> evict+0x282/0x4e0
>>>>> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
>>>>> dput+0x2dd/0x720
>>>>> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
>>>>> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
>>>>> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
>>>>>
>>>>> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
>>>>> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
>>>>> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
>>>>> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
>>>>> data inode in sanity_check_inode().
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>>> Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
>>>>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
>>>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>>>>> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
>>>>> */
>>>>> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
>>>>> {
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
>>>>> + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
>>>>> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
>>>>> + return true;
>>>>> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
>>>>> f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
>>>>> }
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>>> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>>>>> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
>>>>> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
>>>>> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
>>>>
>>>> It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
>>>
>>> sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization,
>>> file should not be set as atomic one, right?
>>>
>>> I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you
>>> please provide me detail of the testcase?
>>
>> I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error
>> messages resulting in open failures of database files.
>
> Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log?
>
> From: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode
>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++----
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> */
> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> {
> + /*
> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> + */
> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> + return true;
> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> }
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> }
> }
>
> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
> + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode,
> + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode),
> + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode),
> + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode),
> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL);
> return false;
> }
>
On 05/08, Chao Yu wrote:
> Ping,
This is in my TODO list, but will take some time. Sorry.
>
> On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote:
> > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The kernel message is shown below:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
> > > > > > Call Trace:
> > > > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0
> > > > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
> > > > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720
> > > > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
> > > > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
> > > > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
> > > > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
> > > > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
> > > > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
> > > > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> > > > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
> > > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
> > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> > > > > > */
> > > > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > + /*
> > > > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> > > > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> > > > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> > > > > > + return true;
> > > > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> > > > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
> > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> > > > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> > > > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
> > > >
> > > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization,
> > > > file should not be set as atomic one, right?
> > > >
> > > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you
> > > > please provide me detail of the testcase?
> > >
> > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error
> > > messages resulting in open failures of database files.
> >
> > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log?
> >
> > From: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++----
> > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> > */
> > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> > {
> > + /*
> > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> > + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> > + */
> > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> > + return true;
> > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> > f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> > }
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
> > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
> > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode,
> > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode),
> > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode),
> > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode),
> > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL);
> > return false;
> > }
> >
On 05/09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 05/08, Chao Yu wrote:
> > Ping,
>
> This is in my TODO list, but will take some time. Sorry.
Got this.
sanity_check_inode: inode (ino=1125d, mode=41471) reason(0, 98, 3452, 4, 0, 0) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix
Ok, this is a symlink, which was encrypted having inline_data.
>
> >
> > On 2022/5/5 22:33, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2022/5/5 11:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > On 05/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > On 2022/5/5 5:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > > On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > > > As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The kernel message is shown below:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
> > > > > > > Call Trace:
> > > > > > > evict+0x282/0x4e0
> > > > > > > __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
> > > > > > > dput+0x2dd/0x720
> > > > > > > do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
> > > > > > > __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
> > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
> > > > > > > flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
> > > > > > > it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
> > > > > > > page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
> > > > > > > data inode in sanity_check_inode().
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > > > > > Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> > > > > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
> > > > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > > > > > index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > > > > > @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > + /*
> > > > > > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> > > > > > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> > > > > > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> > > > > > > + return true;
> > > > > > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> > > > > > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > > > > index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > > > > @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> > > > > > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> > > > > > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It seems f2fs_may_inline_data() is breaking the atomic write case. Please fix.
> > > > >
> > > > > sanity_check_inode() change only affect f2fs_iget(), during inode initialization,
> > > > > file should not be set as atomic one, right?
> > > > >
> > > > > I didn't see any failure during 'f2fs_io write atomic_write' testcase... could you
> > > > > please provide me detail of the testcase?
> > > >
> > > > I just applied this into my device and was getting lots of the below error
> > > > messages resulting in open failures of database files.
> > >
> > > Could you please help to apply below patch and dump the log?
> > >
> > > From: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> > > Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to do sanity check for inline inode
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 11 +++++++----
> > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > index 0f8c426aed50..13a9212d6cb6 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > > @@ -4159,6 +4159,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> > > */
> > > static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> > > {
> > > + /*
> > > + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> > > + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> > > + */
> > > + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> > > + return true;
> > > return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> > > f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> > > }
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > index 02630c17da93..a98614a24ad0 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > @@ -276,11 +276,14 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> > > - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> > > + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
> > > set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> > > - f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> > > - __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
> > > + f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) reason(%d, %llu, %ld, %d, %d, %lu) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> > > + __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode,
> > > + f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode),
> > > + i_size_read(inode), MAX_INLINE_DATA(inode),
> > > + file_is_encrypt(inode), file_is_verity(inode),
> > > + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL);
> > > return false;
> > > }
> > >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
On 04/28, Chao Yu wrote:
> As Yanming reported in bugzilla:
>
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215895
>
> I have encountered a bug in F2FS file system in kernel v5.17.
>
> The kernel message is shown below:
>
> kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:611!
> Call Trace:
> evict+0x282/0x4e0
> __dentry_kill+0x2b2/0x4d0
> dput+0x2dd/0x720
> do_renameat2+0x596/0x970
> __x64_sys_rename+0x78/0x90
> do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
>
> The root cause is: fuzzed inode has both inline_data flag and encrypted
> flag, so after it was deleted by rename(), during f2fs_evict_inode(),
> it will cause inline data conversion due to flags confilction, then
> page cache will be polluted and trigger panic in clear_inode().
>
> This patch tries to fix the issue by do more sanity checks for inline
> data inode in sanity_check_inode().
>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Reported-by: Ming Yan <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 7 +++++++
> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 3 +--
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 27aa93caec06..64c511b498cc 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -4173,6 +4173,13 @@ static inline void f2fs_set_encrypted_inode(struct inode *inode)
> */
> static inline bool f2fs_post_read_required(struct inode *inode)
> {
> + /*
> + * used by sanity_check_inode(), when disk layout fields has not
> + * been synchronized to inmem fields.
> + */
> + if (file_is_encrypt(inode) || file_is_verity(inode) ||
> + F2FS_I(inode)->i_flags & F2FS_COMPR_FL)
> + return true;
> return f2fs_encrypted_file(inode) || fsverity_active(inode) ||
> f2fs_compressed_file(inode);
> }
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> index 83639238a1fe..234b8ed02644 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> @@ -276,8 +276,7 @@ static bool sanity_check_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> }
> }
>
> - if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) &&
> - (!S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode))) {
> + if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode) && !f2fs_may_inline_data(inode)) {
BTW, why can't we just check the above on-disk fields here only?
> set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> f2fs_warn(sbi, "%s: inode (ino=%lx, mode=%u) should not have inline_data, run fsck to fix",
> __func__, inode->i_ino, inode->i_mode);
> --
> 2.25.1