On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 05:47:15PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> After we corrupted an attr leaf block (under node block), getxattr
> might hit EFSCORRUPTED in xfs_attr_node_get when it does
> xfs_attr_node_hasname. A known bug cause xfs_attr_node_get won't do
> xfs_buf_trans release job, then a subsequent removexattr will hang.
>
> This case covers a1de97fe296c ("xfs: Fix the free logic of state in
> xfs_attr_node_hasname")
>
> Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <zlang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Hi,
>
> It's been long time past, since Yang Xu tried to cover a regression bug
> by changing xfs/126 (be Nacked):
> https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/1642407736-3898-1-git-send-email-xuyang2018.jy@xxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> As we (Red Hat) need to cover this regression issue too, and have waited so
> long time. I think no one is doing this job now, so I'm trying to write a new one
> case to cover it. If Yang has completed his test case but forgot to send out,
> feel free to tell me :)
>
> Thanks,
> Zorro
>
> tests/xfs/999 | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tests/xfs/999.out | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 82 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 tests/xfs/999
> create mode 100644 tests/xfs/999.out
>
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/999 b/tests/xfs/999
> new file mode 100755
> index 00000000..65d99883
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/xfs/999
> @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +# Copyright (c) 2022 Red Hat, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
> +#
> +# FS QA Test No. 999
> +#
> +# This's a regression test for:
> +# a1de97fe296c ("xfs: Fix the free logic of state in xfs_attr_node_hasname")
> +#
> +# After we corrupted an attr leaf block (under node block), getxattr might hit
> +# EFSCORRUPTED in xfs_attr_node_get when it does xfs_attr_node_hasname. A bug
> +# cause xfs_attr_node_get won't do xfs_buf_trans release job, then a subsequent
> +# removexattr will hang.
> +#
> +. ./common/preamble
> +_begin_fstest auto quick attr
> +
> +# Import common functions.
> +. ./common/filter
> +. ./common/attr
> +. ./common/populate
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +_supported_fs xfs
> +_fixed_by_kernel_commit a1de97fe296c \
> + "xfs: Fix the free logic of state in xfs_attr_node_hasname"
> +
> +_require_scratch_nocheck
> +# Only test with v5 xfs on-disk format
> +_require_scratch_xfs_crc
> +_require_attrs
> +_require_populate_commands
> +_require_xfs_db_blocktrash_z_command
> +
> +_scratch_mkfs_xfs | _filter_mkfs >$seqres.full 2>$tmp.mkfs
> +source $tmp.mkfs
> +_scratch_mount
> +
> +# This case will use 10 bytes xattr namelen and 11+ bytes valuelen, so:
> +# sizeof(xfs_attr_leaf_name_local) = 2 + 1 + 10 + 11 = 24,
> +# sizeof(xfs_attr_leaf_entry) = 8
> +# So count in the header, if I create more than $((dbsize / 32)) xattr entries,
> +# it will out of a leaf block (not much), then get one node block and two or
> +# more leaf blocks, that's the testing need.
I think this last sentence could be clearer:
"Create more than $((dbsize / 32)) xattr entries to force the creation
of a node block, which we need for this test."
> +nr_xattr="$((dbsize / 32))"
> +localfile="${SCRATCH_MNT}/attrfile"
> +touch $localfile
> +for ((i=0; i<nr_xattr; i++));do
> + $SETFATTR_PROG -n user.x$(printf "%.09d" "$i") -v "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" $localfile
> +done
> +inumber="$(stat -c '%i' $localfile)"
Though I also wonder, could you just steal this line:
__populate_create_attr "${SCRATCH_MNT}/ATTR.FMT_NODE" "$((8 * blksz / 40))"
from _scratch_xfs_populate?
> +_scratch_unmount
> +
> +# Expect the ablock 0 is a node block, later ablocks(>=1) are leaf blocks, then corrupt
> +# the last leaf block. (Don't corrupt node block, or can't reproduce the bug)
> +magic=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "hdr.info.hdr.magic" "inode $inumber" "ablock 0")
> +level=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "hdr.level" "inode $inumber" "ablock 0")
> +count=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "hdr.count" "inode $inumber" "ablock 0")
> +if [ "$magic" = "0x3ebe" -a "$level" = "1" ];then
> + # Corrupt the last leaf block
> + _scratch_xfs_db -x -c "inode ${inumber}" -c "ablock $count" -c "stack" \
> + -c "blocktrash -x 32 -y $((dbsize*8)) -3 -z" >> $seqres.full
> +else
> + _fail "The ablock 0 isn't a root node block, maybe case issue"
Might want to capture the magic and level here so that we can diagnose
test setup failures.
> +fi
> +
> +# This's the real testing, expect removexattr won't hang or panic.
> +if _try_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full 2>&1; then
> + for ((i=0; i<nr_xattr; i++));do
> + $GETFATTR_PROG -n user.x$(printf "%.09d" "$i") $localfile >/dev/null 2>&1
> + $SETFATTR_PROG -x user.x$(printf "%.09d" "$i") $localfile 2>/dev/null
> + done
> +else
> + _notrun "XFS refused to mount with this xattr corrutpion, test skipped"
When does mount fail? Or is this a precaution?
--D
> +fi
> +
> +echo "Silence is golden"
> +# success, all done
> +status=0
> +exit
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/999.out b/tests/xfs/999.out
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..3b276ca8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/xfs/999.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> +QA output created by 999
> +Silence is golden
> --
> 2.31.1
>
