On Wed, 2021-07-07 at 19:51 +0100, Calum Mackay wrote: > hi Trond, > > I had a question about these two old commits of yours, from v5.0 & > v5.2: > > 14bebe3c90b3 NFS: Don't interrupt file writeout due to fatal errors > (2 > years, 2 months ago) > > 8fc75bed96bb NFS: Fix up return value on fatal errors in > nfs_page_async_flush() (2 years, 5 months ago) > > > I am looking at a crash dump, with a kernel based on an older-still > v4.14 stable which did not have either of the above commits. > > PANIC: "BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference > at > 0000000000000080" > > [exception RIP: _raw_spin_lock+20] > > #10 [ffffb1493d78fcb8] nfs_updatepage at ffffffffc08f1791 [nfs] > #11 [ffffb1493d78fd10] nfs_write_end at ffffffffc08e094e [nfs] > #12 [ffffb1493d78fd58] generic_perform_write at ffffffffa71d458b > #13 [ffffb1493d78fde0] nfs_file_write at ffffffffc08dfdb4 [nfs] > #14 [ffffb1493d78fe18] __vfs_write at ffffffffa72848bc > #15 [ffffb1493d78fea0] vfs_write at ffffffffa7284ad2 > #16 [ffffb1493d78fee0] sys_write at ffffffffa7284d35 > #17 [ffffb1493d78ff28] do_syscall_64 at ffffffffa7003949 > > the real sequence, obscured by compiler inlining, is: > > nfs_updatepage > nfs_writepage_setup > nfs_setup_write_request > nfs_inode_add_request > spin_lock(&mapping->private_lock); > > and we crash since the as mapping pointer is NULL. > > > I thought I was able to construct a possible sequence that would > explain > the above, if we are in (from above): > > nfs_setup_write_request > nfs_try_to_update_request > nfs_wb_page > nfs_writepage_locked > nfs_do_writepage > > and nfs_page_async_flush detects a fatal server error, and calls > nfs_write_error_remove_page, which results in the page->mapping set > to NULL. > > In that version of the code, without your commits above, > nfs_page_async_flush returns 0 in this case, which I thought might > result in nfs_setup_write_request going ahead and calling > nfs_inode_add_request with that page, resulting in the crash seen. > > > I then discovered your v5.0 commit: > > 8fc75bed96bb NFS: Fix up return value on fatal errors in > nfs_page_async_flush() (2 years, 5 months ago) > > which appeared to correct that, having nfs_page_async_flush return > the > error in this case, so we would not end up in nfs_inode_add_request. > > > But I then spotted your later v5.2 commit: > > 14bebe3c90b3 NFS: Don't interrupt file writeout due to fatal errors > (2 > years, 2 months ago) > > which changes things back, so that nfs_page_async_flush now again > returns 0, in the "launder" case, and that's how that code remains > today. > > > If so, is there anything to stop the possible crash path that I > describe > above? > > > path I suggest above? Or perhaps I'm missing another commit that > stops > it happening, even after your second commit above? > In order for page->mapping to get set to NULL, we'd have to be removing the page from the page cache altogether. I'm not seeing where we'd be doing that here. It certainly isn't possible for some third party to do so, since our thread is holding the page lock and I'm not seeing where the call to nfs_write_error() might be doing so. We do call nfs_inode_remove_request(), which removes the struct nfs_page that is tracking the page dirtiness, however it shouldn't ever result in the removal of the pagecache page itself. Am I misreading your email? Cheers Trond -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
