On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:29:25PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 09:00:30PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Darrick J. Wong > >> <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 03:40:24PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > When calling into _xfs_log_force{,_lsn}() with a pointer > >> >> > to log_flushed variable, log_flushed will be set to 1 if: > >> >> > 1. xlog_sync() is called to flush the active log buffer > >> >> > AND/OR > >> >> > 2. xlog_wait() is called to wait on a syncing log buffers > >> >> > > >> >> > xfs_file_fsync() checks the value of log_flushed after > >> >> > _xfs_log_force_lsn() call to optimize away an explicit > >> >> > PREFLUSH request to the data block device after writing > >> >> > out all the file's pages to disk. > >> >> > > >> >> > This optimization is incorrect in the following sequence of events: > >> >> > > >> >> > Task A Task B > >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> > xfs_file_fsync() > >> >> > _xfs_log_force_lsn() > >> >> > xlog_sync() > >> >> > [submit PREFLUSH] > >> >> > xfs_file_fsync() > >> >> > file_write_and_wait_range() > >> >> > [submit WRITE X] > >> >> > [endio WRITE X] > >> >> > _xfs_log_force_lsn() > >> >> > xlog_wait() > >> >> > [endio PREFLUSH] > >> >> > > >> >> > The write X is not guarantied to be on persistent storage > >> >> > when PREFLUSH request in completed, because write A was submitted > >> >> > after the PREFLUSH request, but xfs_file_fsync() of task A will > >> >> > be notified of log_flushed=1 and will skip explicit flush. > >> >> > > >> >> > If the system crashes after fsync of task A, write X may not be > >> >> > present on disk after reboot. > >> >> > > >> >> > This bug was discovered and demonstrated using Josef Bacik's > >> >> > dm-log-writes target, which can be used to record block io operations > >> >> > and then replay a subset of these operations onto the target device. > >> >> > The test goes something like this: > >> >> > - Use fsx to execute ops of a file and record ops on log device > >> >> > - Every now and then fsync the file, store md5 of file and mark > >> >> > the location in the log > >> >> > - Then replay log onto device for each mark, mount fs and compare > >> >> > md5 of file to stored value > >> >> > > >> >> > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > >> >> > Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx> > >> >> > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > --- > >> >> > > >> >> > Christoph, Dave, > >> >> > > >> >> > It's hard to believe, but I think the reported bug has been around > >> >> > since 2005 f538d4da8d52 ("[XFS] write barrier support"), but I did > >> >> > not try to test old kernels. > >> >> > >> >> Forgot to tag commit message with: > >> >> Fixes: f538d4da8d52 ("[XFS] write barrier support") > >> >> > >> >> Maybe the tag could be added when applying to recent stables, > >> >> so distros and older downstream stables can see the tag. > >> >> > >> >> The disclosure of the security bug fix (commit b31ff3cdf5) made me wonder > >> >> if possible data loss bug should also be disclosed in some distros forum? > >> >> I bet some users would care more about the latter than the former. > >> >> Coincidentally, both data loss and security bugs fix the same commit.. > >> > > >> > Yes the the patch ought to get sent on to stable w/ fixes tag. One > >> > would hope that the distros will pick up the stable fixes from there. > >> > >> > >> Greg, for your consideration, please add > >> Fixes: f538d4da8d52 ("[XFS] write barrier support") > >> If not pushed yet. > > > > Add it to what? > > Sorry, add that tag when applying commit 47c7d0b1950258312 > to stable trees, since I missed adding the tag before it was merged > to master. Nah, as the tag is just needed to let me know where to backport stuff to, I don't think it matters when I add it to the stable tree itself, so I'll leave it as-is. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html