3.16.85-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
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>
[bwh: Backported to 3.16: Use EXT4_HAS_COMPAT_FEATURE()]
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
--- a/fs/ext4/extents.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c
@@ -503,10 +503,15 @@ __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_COMPAT_FEATURE(inode->i_sb,
+ EXT4_FEATURE_COMPAT_HAS_JOURNAL) ||
+ (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
