linux-stable.git/fs/btrfs, branch linux-6.5.y

btrfs: zoned: wait for data BG to be finished on direct IO allocation

2023-11-28T17:15:11+00:00

commit 776a838f1fa95670c1c1cf7109a898090b473fa3 upstream.

Running the fio command below on a ZNS device results in "Resource
temporarily unavailable" error.

  $ sudo fio --name=w --directory=/mnt --filesize=1GB --bs=16MB --numjobs=16 \
        --rw=write --ioengine=libaio --iodepth=128 --direct=1

  fio: io_u error on file /mnt/w.2.0: Resource temporarily unavailable: write offset=117440512, buflen=16777216
  fio: io_u error on file /mnt/w.2.0: Resource temporarily unavailable: write offset=134217728, buflen=16777216
  ...

This happens because -EAGAIN error returned from btrfs_reserve_extent()
called from btrfs_new_extent_direct() is spilling over to the userland.

btrfs_reserve_extent() returns -EAGAIN when there is no active zone
available. Then, the caller should wait for some other on-going IO to
finish a zone and retry the allocation.

This logic is already implemented for buffered write in cow_file_range(),
but it is missing for the direct IO counterpart. Implement the same logic
for it.

Reported-by: Shinichiro Kawasaki 
Fixes: 2ce543f47843 ("btrfs: zoned: wait until zone is finished when allocation didn't progress")
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 6.1+
Tested-by: Shinichiro Kawasaki 
Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn 
Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

btrfs: don't arbitrarily slow down delalloc if we're committing

2023-11-28T17:15:05+00:00

commit 11aeb97b45ad2e0040cbb2a589bc403152526345 upstream.

We have a random schedule_timeout() if the current transaction is
committing, which seems to be a holdover from the original delalloc
reservation code.

Remove this, we have the proper flushing stuff, we shouldn't be hoping
for random timing things to make everything work.  This just induces
latency for no reason.

CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.4+
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

btrfs: abort transaction on generation mismatch when marking eb as dirty

2023-11-28T17:14:40+00:00

[ Upstream commit 50564b651d01c19ce732819c5b3c3fd60707188e ]

When marking an extent buffer as dirty, at btrfs_mark_buffer_dirty(),
we check if its generation matches the running transaction and if not we
just print a warning. Such mismatch is an indicator that something really
went wrong and only printing a warning message (and stack trace) is not
enough to prevent a corruption. Allowing a transaction to commit with such
an extent buffer will trigger an error if we ever try to read it from disk
due to a generation mismatch with its parent generation.

So abort the current transaction with -EUCLEAN if we notice a generation
mismatch. For this we need to pass a transaction handle to
btrfs_mark_buffer_dirty() which is always available except in test code,
in which case we can pass NULL since it operates on dummy extent buffers
and all test roots have a single node/leaf (root node at level 0).

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: make found_logical_ret parameter mandatory for function queue_scrub_stripe()

2023-11-20T10:57:26+00:00

[ Upstream commit 47e2b06b7b5cb356a987ba3429550c3a89ea89d6 ]

[BUG]
There is a compilation warning reported on commit ae76d8e3e135 ("btrfs:
scrub: fix grouping of read IO"), where gcc (14.0.0 20231022 experimental)
is reporting the following uninitialized variable:

  fs/btrfs/scrub.c: In function ‘scrub_simple_mirror.isra’:
  fs/btrfs/scrub.c:2075:29: error: ‘found_logical’ may be used uninitialized [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized[https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wmaybe-uninitialized]]
   2075 |                 cur_logical = found_logical + BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN;
  fs/btrfs/scrub.c:2040:21: note: ‘found_logical’ was declared here
   2040 |                 u64 found_logical;
        |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~

[CAUSE]
This is a false alert, as @found_logical is passed as parameter
@found_logical_ret of function queue_scrub_stripe().

As long as queue_scrub_stripe() returned 0, we would update
@found_logical_ret.  And if queue_scrub_stripe() returned >0 or <0, the
caller would not utilized @found_logical, thus there should be nothing
wrong.

Although the triggering gcc is still experimental, it looks like the
extra check on "if (found_logical_ret)" can sometimes confuse the
compiler.

Meanwhile the only caller of queue_scrub_stripe() is always passing a
valid pointer, there is no need for such check at all.

[FIX]
Although the report itself is a false alert, we can still make it more
explicit by:

- Replace the check for @found_logical_ret with ASSERT()

- Initialize @found_logical to U64_MAX

- Add one extra ASSERT() to make sure @found_logical got updated

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/87fs1x1p93.fsf@gentoo.org/
Fixes: ae76d8e3e135 ("btrfs: scrub: fix grouping of read IO")
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain 
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: use u64 for buffer sizes in the tree search ioctls

2023-11-20T10:57:26+00:00

[ Upstream commit dec96fc2dcb59723e041416b8dc53e011b4bfc2e ]

In the tree search v2 ioctl we use the type size_t, which is an unsigned
long, to track the buffer size in the local variable 'buf_size'. An
unsigned long is 32 bits wide on a 32 bits architecture. The buffer size
defined in struct btrfs_ioctl_search_args_v2 is a u64, so when we later
try to copy the local variable 'buf_size' to the argument struct, when
the search returns -EOVERFLOW, we copy only 32 bits which will be a
problem on big endian systems.

Fix this by using a u64 type for the buffer sizes, not only at
btrfs_ioctl_tree_search_v2(), but also everywhere down the call chain
so that we can use the u64 at btrfs_ioctl_tree_search_v2().

Fixes: cc68a8a5a433 ("btrfs: new ioctl TREE_SEARCH_V2")
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/ce6f4bd6-9453-4ffe-ba00-cee35495e10f@moroto.mountain/
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: fix unwritten extent buffer after snapshotting a new subvolume

2023-11-02T08:36:50+00:00

[ Upstream commit eb96e221937af3c7bb8a63208dbab813ca5d3d7e ]

When creating a snapshot of a subvolume that was created in the current
transaction, we can end up not persisting a dirty extent buffer that is
referenced by the snapshot, resulting in IO errors due to checksum failures
when trying to read the extent buffer later from disk. A sequence of steps
that leads to this is the following:

1) At ioctl.c:create_subvol() we allocate an extent buffer, with logical
   address 36007936, for the leaf/root of a new subvolume that has an ID
   of 291. We mark the extent buffer as dirty, and at this point the
   subvolume tree has a single node/leaf which is also its root (level 0);

2) We no longer commit the transaction used to create the subvolume at
   create_subvol(). We used to, but that was recently removed in
   commit 1b53e51a4a8f ("btrfs: don't commit transaction for every subvol
   create");

3) The transaction used to create the subvolume has an ID of 33, so the
   extent buffer 36007936 has a generation of 33;

4) Several updates happen to subvolume 291 during transaction 33, several
   files created and its tree height changes from 0 to 1, so we end up with
   a new root at level 1 and the extent buffer 36007936 is now a leaf of
   that new root node, which is extent buffer 36048896.

   The commit root remains as 36007936, since we are still at transaction
   33;

5) Creation of a snapshot of subvolume 291, with an ID of 292, starts at
   ioctl.c:create_snapshot(). This triggers a commit of transaction 33 and
   we end up at transaction.c:create_pending_snapshot(), in the critical
   section of a transaction commit.

   There we COW the root of subvolume 291, which is extent buffer 36048896.
   The COW operation returns extent buffer 36048896, since there's no need
   to COW because the extent buffer was created in this transaction and it
   was not written yet.

   The we call btrfs_copy_root() against the root node 36048896. During
   this operation we allocate a new extent buffer to turn into the root
   node of the snapshot, copy the contents of the root node 36048896 into
   this snapshot root extent buffer, set the owner to 292 (the ID of the
   snapshot), etc, and then we call btrfs_inc_ref(). This will create a
   delayed reference for each leaf pointed by the root node with a
   reference root of 292 - this includes a reference for the leaf
   36007936.

   After that we set the bit BTRFS_ROOT_FORCE_COW in the root's state.

   Then we call btrfs_insert_dir_item(), to create the directory entry in
   in the tree of subvolume 291 that points to the snapshot. This ends up
   needing to modify leaf 36007936 to insert the respective directory
   items. Because the bit BTRFS_ROOT_FORCE_COW is set for the root's state,
   we need to COW the leaf. We end up at btrfs_force_cow_block() and then
   at update_ref_for_cow().

   At update_ref_for_cow() we call btrfs_block_can_be_shared() which
   returns false, despite the fact the leaf 36007936 is shared - the
   subvolume's root and the snapshot's root point to that leaf. The
   reason that it incorrectly returns false is because the commit root
   of the subvolume is extent buffer 36007936 - it was the initial root
   of the subvolume when we created it. So btrfs_block_can_be_shared()
   which has the following logic:

   int btrfs_block_can_be_shared(struct btrfs_root *root,
                                 struct extent_buffer *buf)
   {
       if (test_bit(BTRFS_ROOT_SHAREABLE, &root->state) &&
           buf != root->node && buf != root->commit_root &&
           (btrfs_header_generation(buf) <=
            btrfs_root_last_snapshot(&root->root_item) ||
            btrfs_header_flag(buf, BTRFS_HEADER_FLAG_RELOC)))
               return 1;

       return 0;
   }

   Returns false (0) since 'buf' (extent buffer 36007936) matches the
   root's commit root.

   As a result, at update_ref_for_cow(), we don't check for the number
   of references for extent buffer 36007936, we just assume it's not
   shared and therefore that it has only 1 reference, so we set the local
   variable 'refs' to 1.

   Later on, in the final if-else statement at update_ref_for_cow():

   static noinline int update_ref_for_cow(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
                                          struct btrfs_root *root,
                                          struct extent_buffer *buf,
                                          struct extent_buffer *cow,
                                          int *last_ref)
   {
      (...)
      if (refs > 1) {
          (...)
      } else {
          (...)
          btrfs_clear_buffer_dirty(trans, buf);
          *last_ref = 1;
      }
   }

   So we mark the extent buffer 36007936 as not dirty, and as a result
   we don't write it to disk later in the transaction commit, despite the
   fact that the snapshot's root points to it.

   Attempting to access the leaf or dumping the tree for example shows
   that the extent buffer was not written:

   $ btrfs inspect-internal dump-tree -t 292 /dev/sdb
   btrfs-progs v6.2.2
   file tree key (292 ROOT_ITEM 33)
   node 36110336 level 1 items 2 free space 119 generation 33 owner 292
   node 36110336 flags 0x1(WRITTEN) backref revision 1
   checksum stored a8103e3e
   checksum calced a8103e3e
   fs uuid 90c9a46f-ae9f-4626-9aff-0cbf3e2e3a79
   chunk uuid e8c9c885-78f4-4d31-85fe-89e5f5fd4a07
           key (256 INODE_ITEM 0) block 36007936 gen 33
           key (257 EXTENT_DATA 0) block 36052992 gen 33
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   total bytes 107374182400
   bytes used 38572032
   uuid 90c9a46f-ae9f-4626-9aff-0cbf3e2e3a79

   The respective on disk region is full of zeroes as the device was
   trimmed at mkfs time.

   Obviously 'btrfs check' also detects and complains about this:

   $ btrfs check /dev/sdb
   Opening filesystem to check...
   Checking filesystem on /dev/sdb
   UUID: 90c9a46f-ae9f-4626-9aff-0cbf3e2e3a79
   generation: 33 (33)
   [1/7] checking root items
   [2/7] checking extents
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   bad tree block 36007936, bytenr mismatch, want=36007936, have=0
   owner ref check failed [36007936 4096]
   ERROR: errors found in extent allocation tree or chunk allocation
   [3/7] checking free space tree
   [4/7] checking fs roots
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   checksum verify failed on 36007936 wanted 0x00000000 found 0x86005f29
   bad tree block 36007936, bytenr mismatch, want=36007936, have=0
   The following tree block(s) is corrupted in tree 292:
        tree block bytenr: 36110336, level: 1, node key: (256, 1, 0)
   root 292 root dir 256 not found
   ERROR: errors found in fs roots
   found 38572032 bytes used, error(s) found
   total csum bytes: 16048
   total tree bytes: 1265664
   total fs tree bytes: 1118208
   total extent tree bytes: 65536
   btree space waste bytes: 562598
   file data blocks allocated: 65978368
    referenced 36569088

Fix this by updating btrfs_block_can_be_shared() to consider that an
extent buffer may be shared if it matches the commit root and if its
generation matches the current transaction's generation.

This can be reproduced with the following script:

   $ cat test.sh
   #!/bin/bash

   MNT=/mnt/sdi
   DEV=/dev/sdi

   # Use a filesystem with a 64K node size so that we have the same node
   # size on every machine regardless of its page size (on x86_64 default
   # node size is 16K due to the 4K page size, while on PPC it's 64K by
   # default). This way we can make sure we are able to create a btree for
   # the subvolume with a height of 2.
   mkfs.btrfs -f -n 64K $DEV
   mount $DEV $MNT

   btrfs subvolume create $MNT/subvol

   # Create a few empty files on the subvolume, this bumps its btree
   # height to 2 (root node at level 1 and 2 leaves).
   for ((i = 1; i <= 300; i++)); do
       echo -n > $MNT/subvol/file_$i
   done

   btrfs subvolume snapshot -r $MNT/subvol $MNT/subvol/snap

   umount $DEV

   btrfs check $DEV

Running it on a 6.5 kernel (or any 6.6-rc kernel at the moment):

   $ ./test.sh
   Create subvolume '/mnt/sdi/subvol'
   Create a readonly snapshot of '/mnt/sdi/subvol' in '/mnt/sdi/subvol/snap'
   Opening filesystem to check...
   Checking filesystem on /dev/sdi
   UUID: bbdde2ff-7d02-45ca-8a73-3c36f23755a1
   [1/7] checking root items
   [2/7] checking extents
   parent transid verify failed on 30539776 wanted 7 found 5
   parent transid verify failed on 30539776 wanted 7 found 5
   parent transid verify failed on 30539776 wanted 7 found 5
   Ignoring transid failure
   owner ref check failed [30539776 65536]
   ERROR: errors found in extent allocation tree or chunk allocation
   [3/7] checking free space tree
   [4/7] checking fs roots
   parent transid verify failed on 30539776 wanted 7 found 5
   Ignoring transid failure
   Wrong key of child node/leaf, wanted: (256, 1, 0), have: (2, 132, 0)
   Wrong generation of child node/leaf, wanted: 5, have: 7
   root 257 root dir 256 not found
   ERROR: errors found in fs roots
   found 917504 bytes used, error(s) found
   total csum bytes: 0
   total tree bytes: 851968
   total fs tree bytes: 393216
   total extent tree bytes: 65536
   btree space waste bytes: 736550
   file data blocks allocated: 0
    referenced 0

A test case for fstests will follow soon.

Fixes: 1b53e51a4a8f ("btrfs: don't commit transaction for every subvol create")
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 6.5+
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik 
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: remove v0 extent handling

2023-11-02T08:36:50+00:00

[ Upstream commit 182741d287fb1ea870ee6ef45aa1915a0b031233 ]

The v0 extent item has been deprecated for a long time, and we don't have
any report from the community either.

So it's time to remove the v0 extent specific error handling, and just
treat them as regular extent tree corruption.

This patch would remove the btrfs_print_v0_err() helper, and enhance the
involved error handling to treat them just as any extent tree
corruption. No reports regarding v0 extents have been seen since the
graceful handling was added in 2018.

This involves:

- btrfs_backref_add_tree_node()
  This change is a little tricky, the new code is changed to only handle
  BTRFS_TREE_BLOCK_REF_KEY and BTRFS_SHARED_BLOCK_REF_KEY.

  But this is safe, as we have rejected any unknown inline refs through
  btrfs_get_extent_inline_ref_type().
  For keyed backrefs, we're safe to skip anything we don't know (that's
  if it can pass tree-checker in the first place).

- btrfs_lookup_extent_info()
- lookup_inline_extent_backref()
- run_delayed_extent_op()
- __btrfs_free_extent()
- add_tree_block()
  Regular error handling of unexpected extent tree item, and abort
  transaction (if we have a trans handle).

- remove_extent_data_ref()
  It's pretty much the same as the regular rejection of unknown backref
  key.
  But for this particular case, we can also remove a BUG_ON().

- extent_data_ref_count()
  We can remove the BTRFS_EXTENT_REF_V0_KEY BUG_ON(), as it would be
  rejected by the only caller.

- btrfs_print_leaf()
  Remove the handling for BTRFS_EXTENT_REF_V0_KEY.

Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Stable-dep-of: eb96e221937a ("btrfs: fix unwritten extent buffer after snapshotting a new subvolume")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: error out when reallocating block for defrag using a stale transaction

2023-10-25T10:16:19+00:00

[ Upstream commit e36f94914021e58ee88a8856c7fdf35adf9c7ee1 ]

At btrfs_realloc_node() we have these checks to verify we are not using a
stale transaction (a past transaction with an unblocked state or higher),
and the only thing we do is to trigger two WARN_ON(). This however is a
critical problem, highly unexpected and if it happens it's most likely due
to a bug, so we should error out and turn the fs into error state so that
such issue is much more easily noticed if it's triggered.

The problem is critical because in btrfs_realloc_node() we COW tree blocks,
and using such stale transaction will lead to not persisting the extent
buffers used for the COW operations, as allocating tree block adds the
range of the respective extent buffers to the ->dirty_pages iotree of the
transaction, and a stale transaction, in the unlocked state or higher,
will not flush dirty extent buffers anymore, therefore resulting in not
persisting the tree block and resource leaks (not cleaning the dirty_pages
iotree for example).

So do the following changes:

1) Return -EUCLEAN if we find a stale transaction;

2) Turn the fs into error state, with error -EUCLEAN, so that no
   transaction can be committed, and generate a stack trace;

3) Combine both conditions into a single if statement, as both are related
   and have the same error message;

4) Mark the check as unlikely, since this is not expected to ever happen.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: error when COWing block from a root that is being deleted

2023-10-25T10:16:19+00:00

[ Upstream commit a2caab29884397e583d09be6546259a83ebfbdb1 ]

At btrfs_cow_block() we check if the block being COWed belongs to a root
that is being deleted and if so we log an error message. However this is
an unexpected case and it indicates a bug somewhere, so we should return
an error and abort the transaction. So change this in the following ways:

1) Abort the transaction with -EUCLEAN, so that if the issue ever happens
   it can easily be noticed;

2) Change the logged message level from error to critical, and change the
   message itself to print the block's logical address and the ID of the
   root;

3) Return -EUCLEAN to the caller;

4) As this is an unexpected scenario, that should never happen, mark the
   check as unlikely, allowing the compiler to potentially generate better
   code.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: error out when COWing block using a stale transaction

2023-10-25T10:16:19+00:00

[ Upstream commit 48774f3bf8b4dd3b1a0e155825c9ce48483db14c ]

At btrfs_cow_block() we have these checks to verify we are not using a
stale transaction (a past transaction with an unblocked state or higher),
and the only thing we do is to trigger a WARN with a message and a stack
trace. This however is a critical problem, highly unexpected and if it
happens it's most likely due to a bug, so we should error out and turn the
fs into error state so that such issue is much more easily noticed if it's
triggered.

The problem is critical because using such stale transaction will lead to
not persisting the extent buffer used for the COW operation, as allocating
a tree block adds the range of the respective extent buffer to the
->dirty_pages iotree of the transaction, and a stale transaction, in the
unlocked state or higher, will not flush dirty extent buffers anymore,
therefore resulting in not persisting the tree block and resource leaks
(not cleaning the dirty_pages iotree for example).

So do the following changes:

1) Return -EUCLEAN if we find a stale transaction;

2) Turn the fs into error state, with error -EUCLEAN, so that no
   transaction can be committed, and generate a stack trace;

3) Combine both conditions into a single if statement, as both are related
   and have the same error message;

4) Mark the check as unlikely, since this is not expected to ever happen.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana 
Reviewed-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: David Sterba 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin