Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 5 Jun 2023 17:08:55 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
        Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, ritesh.list@gmail.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jun.nie@linaro.org,
        ebiggers@kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com,
        yukuai3@huawei.com,
        syzbot+a158d886ca08a3fecca4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ext4: fix race condition between buffer write and
 page_mkwrite
Message-ID: <20230605150855.7oaiplp7r57dcww3@quack3>
References: <20230530134405.322194-1-libaokun1@huawei.com>
 <20230604030445.GF1128744@mit.edu>
 <20230604210821.GA1257572@mit.edu>
 <ZH1BN+H1/Sa4eLQ4@casper.infradead.org>
 <20230605091655.24vl5fjesfskt3o5@quack3>
 <20230605122141.4njwwx3mrapqhvt4@quack3>
 <ZH33ZzwyLFY48tfA@casper.infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZH33ZzwyLFY48tfA@casper.infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon 05-06-23 15:55:35, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 02:21:41PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Mon 05-06-23 11:16:55, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > Yeah, I agree, that is also the conclusion I have arrived at when thinking
> > > about this problem now. We should be able to just remove the conversion
> > > from ext4_page_mkwrite() and rely on write(2) or truncate(2) doing it when
> > > growing i_size.
> > 
> > OK, thinking more about this and searching through the history, I've
> > realized why the conversion is originally in ext4_page_mkwrite(). The
> > problem is described in commit 7b4cc9787fe35b ("ext4: evict inline data
> > when writing to memory map") but essentially it boils down to the fact that
> > ext4 writeback code does not expect dirty page for a file with inline data
> > because ext4_write_inline_data_end() should have copied the data into the
> > inode and cleared the folio's dirty flag.
> > 
> > Indeed messing with xattrs from the writeback path to copy page contents
> > into inline data xattr would be ... interesting. Hum, out of good ideas for
> > now :-|.
> 
> Is it so bad?  Now that we don't have writepage in ext4, only
> writepages, it seems like we have a considerably more benign locking
> environment to work in.

Well, yes, without ->writepage() it might be *possible*. But still rather
ugly. The problem is that in ->writepages() i_size is not stable. Thus also
whether the inode data is inline or not is not stable. We'd need inode_lock
for that but that is not easily doable in the writeback path - inode lock
would then become fs_reclaim unsafe...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR