This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled ext4: don't perform block validity checks on the journal inode to the 4.4-stable tree which can be found at: http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary The filename of the patch is: ext4-don-t-perform-block-validity-checks-on-the-journal-inode.patch and it can be found in the queue-4.4 subdirectory. If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it. >From 0a944e8a6c66ca04c7afbaa17e22bf208a8b37f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 10:27:01 -0400 Subject: ext4: don't perform block validity checks on the journal inode From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> commit 0a944e8a6c66ca04c7afbaa17e22bf208a8b37f0 upstream. Since the journal inode is already checked when we added it to the block validity's system zone, if we check it again, we'll just trigger a failure. This was causing failures like this: [ 53.897001] EXT4-fs error (device sda): ext4_find_extent:909: inode #8: comm jbd2/sda-8: pblk 121667583 bad header/extent: invalid extent entries - magic f30a, entries 8, max 340(340), depth 0(0) [ 53.931430] jbd2_journal_bmap: journal block not found at offset 49 on sda-8 [ 53.938480] Aborting journal on device sda-8. ... but only if the system was under enough memory pressure that logical->physical mapping for the journal inode gets pushed out of the extent cache. (This is why it wasn't noticed earlier.) Fixes: 345c0dbf3a30 ("ext4: protect journal inode's blocks using block_validity") Reported-by: Dan Rue <dan.rue@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> Tested-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Ashwin H <ashwinh@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- fs/ext4/extents.c | 12 ++++++++---- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c @@ -549,10 +549,14 @@ __read_extent_tree_block(const char *fun } if (buffer_verified(bh) && !(flags & EXT4_EX_FORCE_CACHE)) return bh; - err = __ext4_ext_check(function, line, inode, - ext_block_hdr(bh), depth, pblk); - if (err) - goto errout; + if (!ext4_has_feature_journal(inode->i_sb) || + (inode->i_ino != + le32_to_cpu(EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_es->s_journal_inum))) { + err = __ext4_ext_check(function, line, inode, + ext_block_hdr(bh), depth, pblk); + if (err) + goto errout; + } set_buffer_verified(bh); /* * If this is a leaf block, cache all of its entries Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from tytso@xxxxxxx are queue-4.4/ext4-avoid-declaring-fs-inconsistent-due-to-invalid-file-handles.patch queue-4.4/ext4-protect-journal-inode-s-blocks-using-block_validity.patch queue-4.4/ext4-convert-bug_on-s-to-warn_on-s-in-mballoc.c.patch queue-4.4/ext4-unsigned-int-compared-against-zero.patch queue-4.4/ext4-fix-block-validity-checks-for-journal-inodes-using-indirect-blocks.patch queue-4.4/ext4-fix-extent_status-fragmentation-for-plain-files.patch queue-4.4/ext4-don-t-perform-block-validity-checks-on-the-journal-inode.patch