This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
btrfs: fix race between balance and cancel/pause
to the 6.4-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:
btrfs-fix-race-between-balance-and-cancel-pause.patch
and it can be found in the queue-6.4 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
>From b19c98f237cd76981aaded52c258ce93f7daa8cb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 01:05:41 -0400
Subject: btrfs: fix race between balance and cancel/pause
From: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
commit b19c98f237cd76981aaded52c258ce93f7daa8cb upstream.
Syzbot reported a panic that looks like this:
assertion failed: fs_info->exclusive_operation == BTRFS_EXCLOP_BALANCE_PAUSED, in fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:465
------------[ cut here ]------------
kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/messages.c:259!
RIP: 0010:btrfs_assertfail+0x2c/0x30 fs/btrfs/messages.c:259
Call Trace:
<TASK>
btrfs_exclop_balance fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:465 [inline]
btrfs_ioctl_balance fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:3564 [inline]
btrfs_ioctl+0x531e/0x5b30 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:4632
vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
__do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:870 [inline]
__se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:856 [inline]
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x197/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:856
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0x39/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
The reproducer is running a balance and a cancel or pause in parallel.
The way balance finishes is a bit wonky, if we were paused we need to
save the balance_ctl in the fs_info, but clear it otherwise and cleanup.
However we rely on the return values being specific errors, or having a
cancel request or no pause request. If balance completes and returns 0,
but we have a pause or cancel request we won't do the appropriate
cleanup, and then the next time we try to start a balance we'll trip
this ASSERT.
The error handling is just wrong here, we always want to clean up,
unless we got -ECANCELLED and we set the appropriate pause flag in the
exclusive op. With this patch the reproducer ran for an hour without
tripping, previously it would trip in less than a few minutes.
Reported-by: syzbot+c0f3acf145cb465426d5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CC: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 6.1+
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 14 ++++----------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -4071,14 +4071,6 @@ static int alloc_profile_is_valid(u64 fl
return has_single_bit_set(flags);
}
-static inline int balance_need_close(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
-{
- /* cancel requested || normal exit path */
- return atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_cancel_req) ||
- (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_pause_req) == 0 &&
- atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_cancel_req) == 0);
-}
-
/*
* Validate target profile against allowed profiles and return true if it's OK.
* Otherwise print the error message and return false.
@@ -4268,6 +4260,7 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *
u64 num_devices;
unsigned seq;
bool reducing_redundancy;
+ bool paused = false;
int i;
if (btrfs_fs_closing(fs_info) ||
@@ -4398,6 +4391,7 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *
if (ret == -ECANCELED && atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_pause_req)) {
btrfs_info(fs_info, "balance: paused");
btrfs_exclop_balance(fs_info, BTRFS_EXCLOP_BALANCE_PAUSED);
+ paused = true;
}
/*
* Balance can be canceled by:
@@ -4426,8 +4420,8 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *
btrfs_update_ioctl_balance_args(fs_info, bargs);
}
- if ((ret && ret != -ECANCELED && ret != -ENOSPC) ||
- balance_need_close(fs_info)) {
+ /* We didn't pause, we can clean everything up. */
+ if (!paused) {
reset_balance_state(fs_info);
btrfs_exclop_finish(fs_info);
}
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx are
queue-6.4/btrfs-set_page_extent_mapped-after-read_folio-in-btrfs_cont_expand.patch
queue-6.4/btrfs-fix-warning-when-putting-transaction-with-qgroups-enabled-after-abort.patch
queue-6.4/btrfs-fix-race-between-balance-and-cancel-pause.patch
