On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 4:51 PM 崔东亮 (Dongliang Cui)
<Dongliang.Cui@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > We found that when writing a large file through buffer write, if the
> > disk is inaccessible, exFAT does not return an error normally, which
> > leads to the writing process not stopping properly.
> >
> > To easily reproduce this issue, you can follow the steps below:
> >
> > 1. format a device to exFAT and then mount (with a full disk erase) 2.
> > dd if=/dev/zero of=/exfat_mount/test.img bs=1M count=8192 3. eject the
> > device
> >
> > You may find that the dd process does not stop immediately and may
> > continue for a long time.
> >
> > We compared it with the FAT, where FAT would prompt an EIO error and
> > immediately stop the dd operation.
> >
> > The root cause of this issue is that when the exfat_inode contains the
> > ALLOC_NO_FAT_CHAIN flag, exFAT does not need to access the disk to
> > look up directory entries or the FAT table (whereas FAT would do)
> > every time data is written. Instead, exFAT simply marks the buffer as
> > dirty and returns, delegating the writeback operation to the writeback
> > process.
> >
> > If the disk cannot be accessed at this time, the error will only be
> > returned to the writeback process, and the original process will not
> > receive the error, so it cannot be returned to the user side.
> >
> > Therefore, we think that when writing files with ALLOC_NO_FAT_CHAIN,
> > it is necessary to continuously check the status of the disk.
> >
> > When the disk cannot be accessed normally, an error should be returned
> > to stop the writing process.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dongliang Cui <dongliang.cui@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <zhiguo.niu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h | 5 +++++
> > fs/exfat/inode.c | 5 +++++
> > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h b/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h index
> > ecc5db952deb..c5f5a7a8b672 100644
> > --- a/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h
> > +++ b/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h
> > @@ -411,6 +411,11 @@ static inline unsigned int
> > exfat_sector_to_cluster(struct exfat_sb_info *sbi,
> > EXFAT_RESERVED_CLUSTERS; }
> >
> > +static inline bool exfat_check_disk_error(struct block_device *bdev)
> > +{
> > + return blk_queue_dying(bdev_get_queue(bdev));
> Why don't you check it like ext4?
>
> static int block_device_ejected(struct super_block *sb) {
> struct inode *bd_inode = sb->s_bdev->bd_inode;
> struct backing_dev_info *bdi = inode_to_bdi(bd_inode);
>
> return bdi->dev == NULL;
> }
>
> The block_device->bd_inode has been removed in the latest code.
> We might be able to use super_block->s_bdi->dev for the judgment,
> or perhaps use blk_queue_dying?
Hi,
To provide more information,
Related commits for the removal of bd_inode,
203c1ce0bb06 RIP ->bd_inode
Since bd_inode has been removed, referencing the method of ext4 might
not be feasible. Can we consider using one of the following two methods
instead?
For example,
struct int exfat_block_device_ejected(struct super_block *sb)
{
struct backing_dev_info *bdi = sb->s_bdi;
return bdi->dev == NULL;
}
Or,
static inline bool exfat_check_disk_error(struct block_device *bdev)
{
return blk_queue_dying(bdev_get_queue(bdev));
}
Are there any other suggestions?
> > static inline bool is_valid_cluster(struct exfat_sb_info *sbi,
> > unsigned int clus)
> > {
> > diff --git a/fs/exfat/inode.c b/fs/exfat/inode.c index
> > dd894e558c91..efd02c1c83a6 100644
> > --- a/fs/exfat/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/exfat/inode.c
> > @@ -147,6 +147,11 @@ static int exfat_map_cluster(struct inode *inode,
> > unsigned int clu_offset,
> > *clu = last_clu = ei->start_clu;
> >
> > if (ei->flags == ALLOC_NO_FAT_CHAIN) {
> > + if (exfat_check_disk_error(sb->s_bdev)) {
> > + exfat_fs_error(sb, "device inaccessiable!\n");
> > + return -EIO;
> This patch looks useful when using removable storage devices.
> BTW, in case of "ei->flags != ALLOC_NO_FAT_CHAIN", There could be the same problem if it can be found from lru_cache. So, it would be nice to check disk_error regardless ei->flags. Also, Calling exfat_fs_error() seems unnecessary. Instead, let's return -ENODEV instead of -EIO.
> I believe that these errors will be handled on exfat_get_block()
>
>
> Thanks.
> > + }
> > +
> > if (clu_offset > 0 && *clu != EXFAT_EOF_CLUSTER) {
> > last_clu += clu_offset - 1;
> >
> > --
> > 2.25.1
>
>
