On Mon, 2024-03-11 at 11:11 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> We've been seeing the following panic in production
>
> BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000065
> PGD 2f485f067 P4D 2f485f067 PUD 2cc5d8067 PMD 0
> RIP: 0010:ff_layout_cancel_io+0x3a/0x90 [nfs_layout_flexfiles]
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> ? __die+0x78/0xc0
> ? page_fault_oops+0x286/0x380
> ? __rpc_execute+0x2c3/0x470 [sunrpc]
> ? rpc_new_task+0x42/0x1c0 [sunrpc]
> ? exc_page_fault+0x5d/0x110
> ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30
> ? ff_layout_free_layoutreturn+0x110/0x110 [nfs_layout_flexfiles]
> ? ff_layout_cancel_io+0x3a/0x90 [nfs_layout_flexfiles]
> ? ff_layout_cancel_io+0x6f/0x90 [nfs_layout_flexfiles]
> pnfs_mark_matching_lsegs_return+0x1b0/0x360 [nfsv4]
> pnfs_error_mark_layout_for_return+0x9e/0x110 [nfsv4]
> ? ff_layout_send_layouterror+0x50/0x160 [nfs_layout_flexfiles]
> nfs4_ff_layout_prepare_ds+0x11f/0x290 [nfs_layout_flexfiles]
> ff_layout_pg_init_write+0xf0/0x1f0 [nfs_layout_flexfiles]
> __nfs_pageio_add_request+0x154/0x6c0 [nfs]
> nfs_pageio_add_request+0x26b/0x380 [nfs]
> nfs_do_writepage+0x111/0x1e0 [nfs]
> nfs_writepages_callback+0xf/0x30 [nfs]
> write_cache_pages+0x17f/0x380
> ? nfs_pageio_init_write+0x50/0x50 [nfs]
> ? nfs_writepages+0x6d/0x210 [nfs]
> ? nfs_writepages+0x6d/0x210 [nfs]
> nfs_writepages+0x125/0x210 [nfs]
> do_writepages+0x67/0x220
> ? generic_perform_write+0x14b/0x210
> filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x5b/0x80
> file_write_and_wait_range+0x6d/0xc0
> nfs_file_fsync+0x81/0x170 [nfs]
> ? nfs_file_mmap+0x60/0x60 [nfs]
> __x64_sys_fsync+0x53/0x90
> do_syscall_64+0x3d/0x90
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0
>
> Inspecting the core with drgn I was able to pull this
>
> >>> prog.crashed_thread().stack_trace()[0]
> #0 at 0xffffffffa079657a (ff_layout_cancel_io+0x3a/0x84) in ff_layout_cancel_io at fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:2021:27
> >>> prog.crashed_thread().stack_trace()[0]['idx']
> (u32)1
> >>> prog.crashed_thread().stack_trace()[0]['flseg'].mirror_array[1].mirror_ds
> (struct nfs4_ff_layout_ds *)0xffffffffffffffed
>
> This is clear from the stack trace, we call nfs4_ff_layout_prepare_ds()
> which could error out initializing the mirror_ds, and then we go to
> clean it all up and our check is only for if (!mirror->mirror_ds). This
> is inconsistent with the rest of the users of mirror_ds, which have
>
> if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(mirror_ds))
>
> to keep from tripping over this exact scenario. Fix this up in
> ff_layout_cancel_io() to make sure we don't panic when we get an error.
> I also spot checked all the other instances of checking mirror_ds and we
> appear to be doing the correct checks everywhere, only unconditionally
> dereferencing mirror_ds when we know it would be valid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
> ---
> v1->v2:
> - My bad, I missed the formatting of the drgn output and it looked mangled.
>
> fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c b/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c
> index ef817a0475ff..3e724cb7ef01 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c
> @@ -2016,7 +2016,7 @@ static void ff_layout_cancel_io(struct pnfs_layout_segment *lseg)
> for (idx = 0; idx < flseg->mirror_array_cnt; idx++) {
> mirror = flseg->mirror_array[idx];
> mirror_ds = mirror->mirror_ds;
> - if (!mirror_ds)
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(mirror_ds))
> continue;
> ds = mirror->mirror_ds->ds;
> if (!ds)
Nice catch:
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>