linux-stable.git/fs, branch v5.4.93 Linux kernel stable tree cifs: do not fail __smb_send_rqst if non-fatal signals are pending 2021-01-27T10:47:49+00:00 Ronnie Sahlberg lsahlber@redhat.com 2021-01-20T22:22:48+00:00 9a2f6007a228290da343e31881853d43e2dd6543 commit 214a5ea081e77346e4963dd6d20c5539ff8b6ae6 upstream. RHBZ 1848178 The original intent of returning an error in this function in the patch: "CIFS: Mask off signals when sending SMB packets" was to avoid interrupting packet send in the middle of sending the data (and thus breaking an SMB connection), but we also don't want to fail the request for non-fatal signals even before we have had a chance to try to send it (the reported problem could be reproduced e.g. by exiting a child process when the parent process was in the midst of calling futimens to update a file's timestamps). In addition, since the signal may remain pending when we enter the sending loop, we may end up not sending the whole packet before TCP buffers become full. In this case the code returns -EINTR but what we need here is to return -ERESTARTSYS instead to allow system calls to be restarted. Fixes: b30c74c73c78 ("CIFS: Mask off signals when sending SMB packets") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.1+ Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Pavel Shilovsky <pshilov@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 214a5ea081e77346e4963dd6d20c5539ff8b6ae6 upstream.

RHBZ 1848178

The original intent of returning an error in this function
in the patch:
  "CIFS: Mask off signals when sending SMB packets"
was to avoid interrupting packet send in the middle of
sending the data (and thus breaking an SMB connection),
but we also don't want to fail the request for non-fatal
signals even before we have had a chance to try to
send it (the reported problem could be reproduced e.g.
by exiting a child process when the parent process was in
the midst of calling futimens to update a file's timestamps).

In addition, since the signal may remain pending when we enter the
sending loop, we may end up not sending the whole packet before
TCP buffers become full. In this case the code returns -EINTR
but what we need here is to return -ERESTARTSYS instead to
allow system calls to be restarted.

Fixes: b30c74c73c78 ("CIFS: Mask off signals when sending SMB packets")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.1+
Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Pavel Shilovsky <pshilov@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
btrfs: send: fix invalid clone operations when cloning from the same file and root 2021-01-27T10:47:41+00:00 Filipe Manana fdmanana@suse.com 2021-01-11T11:41:42+00:00 d8a487e673abf46c69c901bb25da54e9bc7ba45e commit 518837e65068c385dddc0a87b3e577c8be7c13b1 upstream. When an incremental send finds an extent that is shared, it checks which file extent items in the range refer to that extent, and for those it emits clone operations, while for others it emits regular write operations to avoid corruption at the destination (as described and fixed by commit d906d49fc5f4 ("Btrfs: send, fix file corruption due to incorrect cloning operations")). However when the root we are cloning from is the send root, we are cloning from the inode currently being processed and the source file range has several extent items that partially point to the desired extent, with an offset smaller than the offset in the file extent item for the range we want to clone into, it can cause the algorithm to issue a clone operation that starts at the current eof of the file being processed in the receiver side, in which case the receiver will fail, with EINVAL, when attempting to execute the clone operation. Example reproducer: $ cat test-send-clone.sh #!/bin/bash DEV=/dev/sdi MNT=/mnt/sdi mkfs.btrfs -f $DEV >/dev/null mount $DEV $MNT # Create our test file with a single and large extent (1M) and with # different content for different file ranges that will be reflinked # later. xfs_io -f \ -c "pwrite -S 0xab 0 128K" \ -c "pwrite -S 0xcd 128K 128K" \ -c "pwrite -S 0xef 256K 256K" \ -c "pwrite -S 0x1a 512K 512K" \ $MNT/foobar btrfs subvolume snapshot -r $MNT $MNT/snap1 btrfs send -f /tmp/snap1.send $MNT/snap1 # Now do a series of changes to our file such that we end up with # different parts of the extent reflinked into different file offsets # and we overwrite a large part of the extent too, so no file extent # items refer to that part that was overwritten. This used to confuse # the algorithm used by the kernel to figure out which file ranges to # clone, making it attempt to clone from a source range starting at # the current eof of the file, resulting in the receiver to fail since # it is an invalid clone operation. # xfs_io -c "reflink $MNT/foobar 64K 1M 960K" \ -c "reflink $MNT/foobar 0K 512K 256K" \ -c "reflink $MNT/foobar 512K 128K 256K" \ -c "pwrite -S 0x73 384K 640K" \ $MNT/foobar btrfs subvolume snapshot -r $MNT $MNT/snap2 btrfs send -f /tmp/snap2.send -p $MNT/snap1 $MNT/snap2 echo -e "\nFile digest in the original filesystem:" md5sum $MNT/snap2/foobar # Now unmount the filesystem, create a new one, mount it and try to # apply both send streams to recreate both snapshots. umount $DEV mkfs.btrfs -f $DEV >/dev/null mount $DEV $MNT btrfs receive -f /tmp/snap1.send $MNT btrfs receive -f /tmp/snap2.send $MNT # Must match what we got in the original filesystem of course. echo -e "\nFile digest in the new filesystem:" md5sum $MNT/snap2/foobar umount $MNT When running the reproducer, the incremental send operation fails due to an invalid clone operation: $ ./test-send-clone.sh wrote 131072/131072 bytes at offset 0 128 KiB, 32 ops; 0.0015 sec (80.906 MiB/sec and 20711.9741 ops/sec) wrote 131072/131072 bytes at offset 131072 128 KiB, 32 ops; 0.0013 sec (90.514 MiB/sec and 23171.6148 ops/sec) wrote 262144/262144 bytes at offset 262144 256 KiB, 64 ops; 0.0025 sec (98.270 MiB/sec and 25157.2327 ops/sec) wrote 524288/524288 bytes at offset 524288 512 KiB, 128 ops; 0.0052 sec (95.730 MiB/sec and 24506.9883 ops/sec) Create a readonly snapshot of '/mnt/sdi' in '/mnt/sdi/snap1' At subvol /mnt/sdi/snap1 linked 983040/983040 bytes at offset 1048576 960 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0006 sec (1.419 GiB/sec and 1550.3876 ops/sec) linked 262144/262144 bytes at offset 524288 256 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0020 sec (120.192 MiB/sec and 480.7692 ops/sec) linked 262144/262144 bytes at offset 131072 256 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0018 sec (133.833 MiB/sec and 535.3319 ops/sec) wrote 655360/655360 bytes at offset 393216 640 KiB, 160 ops; 0.0093 sec (66.781 MiB/sec and 17095.8436 ops/sec) Create a readonly snapshot of '/mnt/sdi' in '/mnt/sdi/snap2' At subvol /mnt/sdi/snap2 File digest in the original filesystem: 9c13c61cb0b9f5abf45344375cb04dfa /mnt/sdi/snap2/foobar At subvol snap1 At snapshot snap2 ERROR: failed to clone extents to foobar: Invalid argument File digest in the new filesystem: 132f0396da8f48d2e667196bff882cfc /mnt/sdi/snap2/foobar The clone operation is invalid because its source range starts at the current eof of the file in the receiver, causing the receiver to get an EINVAL error from the clone operation when attempting it. For the example above, what happens is the following: 1) When processing the extent at file offset 1M, the algorithm checks that the extent is shared and can be (fully or partially) found at file offset 0. At this point the file has a size (and eof) of 1M at the receiver; 2) It finds that our extent item at file offset 1M has a data offset of 64K and, since the file extent item at file offset 0 has a data offset of 0, it issues a clone operation, from the same file and root, that has a source range offset of 64K, destination offset of 1M and a length of 64K, since the extent item at file offset 0 refers only to the first 128K of the shared extent. After this clone operation, the file size (and eof) at the receiver is increased from 1M to 1088K (1M + 64K); 3) Now there's still 896K (960K - 64K) of data left to clone or write, so it checks for the next file extent item, which starts at file offset 128K. This file extent item has a data offset of 0 and a length of 256K, so a clone operation with a source range offset of 256K, a destination offset of 1088K (1M + 64K) and length of 128K is issued. After this operation the file size (and eof) at the receiver increases from 1088K to 1216K (1088K + 128K); 4) Now there's still 768K (896K - 128K) of data left to clone or write, so it checks for the next file extent item, located at file offset 384K. This file extent item points to a different extent, not the one we want to clone, with a length of 640K. So we issue a write operation into the file range 1216K (1088K + 128K, end of the last clone operation), with a length of 640K and with a data matching the one we can find for that range in send root. After this operation, the file size (and eof) at the receiver increases from 1216K to 1856K (1216K + 640K); 5) Now there's still 128K (768K - 640K) of data left to clone or write, so we look into the file extent item, which is for file offset 1M and it points to the extent we want to clone, with a data offset of 64K and a length of 960K. However this matches the file offset we started with, the start of the range to clone into. So we can't for sure find any file extent item from here onwards with the rest of the data we want to clone, yet we proceed and since the file extent item points to the shared extent, with a data offset of 64K, we issue a clone operation with a source range starting at file offset 1856K, which matches the file extent item's offset, 1M, plus the amount of data cloned and written so far, which is 64K (step 2) + 128K (step 3) + 640K (step 4). This clone operation is invalid since the source range offset matches the current eof of the file in the receiver. We should have stopped looking for extents to clone at this point and instead fallback to write, which would simply the contain the data in the file range from 1856K to 1856K + 128K. So fix this by stopping the loop that looks for file ranges to clone at clone_range() when we reach the current eof of the file being processed, if we are cloning from the same file and using the send root as the clone root. This ensures any data not yet cloned will be sent to the receiver through a write operation. A test case for fstests will follow soon. Reported-by: Massimo B. <massimo.b@gmx.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/6ae34776e85912960a253a8327068a892998e685.camel@gmx.net/ Fixes: 11f2069c113e ("Btrfs: send, allow clone operations within the same file") CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.5+ Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 518837e65068c385dddc0a87b3e577c8be7c13b1 upstream.

When an incremental send finds an extent that is shared, it checks which
file extent items in the range refer to that extent, and for those it
emits clone operations, while for others it emits regular write operations
to avoid corruption at the destination (as described and fixed by commit
d906d49fc5f4 ("Btrfs: send, fix file corruption due to incorrect cloning
operations")).

However when the root we are cloning from is the send root, we are cloning
from the inode currently being processed and the source file range has
several extent items that partially point to the desired extent, with an
offset smaller than the offset in the file extent item for the range we
want to clone into, it can cause the algorithm to issue a clone operation
that starts at the current eof of the file being processed in the receiver
side, in which case the receiver will fail, with EINVAL, when attempting
to execute the clone operation.

Example reproducer:

  $ cat test-send-clone.sh
  #!/bin/bash

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

  mkfs.btrfs -f $DEV >/dev/null
  mount $DEV $MNT

  # Create our test file with a single and large extent (1M) and with
  # different content for different file ranges that will be reflinked
  # later.
  xfs_io -f \
         -c "pwrite -S 0xab 0 128K" \
         -c "pwrite -S 0xcd 128K 128K" \
         -c "pwrite -S 0xef 256K 256K" \
         -c "pwrite -S 0x1a 512K 512K" \
         $MNT/foobar

  btrfs subvolume snapshot -r $MNT $MNT/snap1
  btrfs send -f /tmp/snap1.send $MNT/snap1

  # Now do a series of changes to our file such that we end up with
  # different parts of the extent reflinked into different file offsets
  # and we overwrite a large part of the extent too, so no file extent
  # items refer to that part that was overwritten. This used to confuse
  # the algorithm used by the kernel to figure out which file ranges to
  # clone, making it attempt to clone from a source range starting at
  # the current eof of the file, resulting in the receiver to fail since
  # it is an invalid clone operation.
  #
  xfs_io -c "reflink $MNT/foobar 64K 1M 960K" \
         -c "reflink $MNT/foobar 0K 512K 256K" \
         -c "reflink $MNT/foobar 512K 128K 256K" \
         -c "pwrite -S 0x73 384K 640K" \
         $MNT/foobar

  btrfs subvolume snapshot -r $MNT $MNT/snap2
  btrfs send -f /tmp/snap2.send -p $MNT/snap1 $MNT/snap2

  echo -e "\nFile digest in the original filesystem:"
  md5sum $MNT/snap2/foobar

  # Now unmount the filesystem, create a new one, mount it and try to
  # apply both send streams to recreate both snapshots.
  umount $DEV

  mkfs.btrfs -f $DEV >/dev/null
  mount $DEV $MNT

  btrfs receive -f /tmp/snap1.send $MNT
  btrfs receive -f /tmp/snap2.send $MNT

  # Must match what we got in the original filesystem of course.
  echo -e "\nFile digest in the new filesystem:"
  md5sum $MNT/snap2/foobar

  umount $MNT

When running the reproducer, the incremental send operation fails due to
an invalid clone operation:

  $ ./test-send-clone.sh
  wrote 131072/131072 bytes at offset 0
  128 KiB, 32 ops; 0.0015 sec (80.906 MiB/sec and 20711.9741 ops/sec)
  wrote 131072/131072 bytes at offset 131072
  128 KiB, 32 ops; 0.0013 sec (90.514 MiB/sec and 23171.6148 ops/sec)
  wrote 262144/262144 bytes at offset 262144
  256 KiB, 64 ops; 0.0025 sec (98.270 MiB/sec and 25157.2327 ops/sec)
  wrote 524288/524288 bytes at offset 524288
  512 KiB, 128 ops; 0.0052 sec (95.730 MiB/sec and 24506.9883 ops/sec)
  Create a readonly snapshot of '/mnt/sdi' in '/mnt/sdi/snap1'
  At subvol /mnt/sdi/snap1
  linked 983040/983040 bytes at offset 1048576
  960 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0006 sec (1.419 GiB/sec and 1550.3876 ops/sec)
  linked 262144/262144 bytes at offset 524288
  256 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0020 sec (120.192 MiB/sec and 480.7692 ops/sec)
  linked 262144/262144 bytes at offset 131072
  256 KiB, 1 ops; 0.0018 sec (133.833 MiB/sec and 535.3319 ops/sec)
  wrote 655360/655360 bytes at offset 393216
  640 KiB, 160 ops; 0.0093 sec (66.781 MiB/sec and 17095.8436 ops/sec)
  Create a readonly snapshot of '/mnt/sdi' in '/mnt/sdi/snap2'
  At subvol /mnt/sdi/snap2

  File digest in the original filesystem:
  9c13c61cb0b9f5abf45344375cb04dfa  /mnt/sdi/snap2/foobar
  At subvol snap1
  At snapshot snap2
  ERROR: failed to clone extents to foobar: Invalid argument

  File digest in the new filesystem:
  132f0396da8f48d2e667196bff882cfc  /mnt/sdi/snap2/foobar

The clone operation is invalid because its source range starts at the
current eof of the file in the receiver, causing the receiver to get
an EINVAL error from the clone operation when attempting it.

For the example above, what happens is the following:

1) When processing the extent at file offset 1M, the algorithm checks that
   the extent is shared and can be (fully or partially) found at file
   offset 0.

   At this point the file has a size (and eof) of 1M at the receiver;

2) It finds that our extent item at file offset 1M has a data offset of
   64K and, since the file extent item at file offset 0 has a data offset
   of 0, it issues a clone operation, from the same file and root, that
   has a source range offset of 64K, destination offset of 1M and a length
   of 64K, since the extent item at file offset 0 refers only to the first
   128K of the shared extent.

   After this clone operation, the file size (and eof) at the receiver is
   increased from 1M to 1088K (1M + 64K);

3) Now there's still 896K (960K - 64K) of data left to clone or write, so
   it checks for the next file extent item, which starts at file offset
   128K. This file extent item has a data offset of 0 and a length of
   256K, so a clone operation with a source range offset of 256K, a
   destination offset of 1088K (1M + 64K) and length of 128K is issued.

   After this operation the file size (and eof) at the receiver increases
   from 1088K to 1216K (1088K + 128K);

4) Now there's still 768K (896K - 128K) of data left to clone or write, so
   it checks for the next file extent item, located at file offset 384K.
   This file extent item points to a different extent, not the one we want
   to clone, with a length of 640K. So we issue a write operation into the
   file range 1216K (1088K + 128K, end of the last clone operation), with
   a length of 640K and with a data matching the one we can find for that
   range in send root.

   After this operation, the file size (and eof) at the receiver increases
   from 1216K to 1856K (1216K + 640K);

5) Now there's still 128K (768K - 640K) of data left to clone or write, so
   we look into the file extent item, which is for file offset 1M and it
   points to the extent we want to clone, with a data offset of 64K and a
   length of 960K.

   However this matches the file offset we started with, the start of the
   range to clone into. So we can't for sure find any file extent item
   from here onwards with the rest of the data we want to clone, yet we
   proceed and since the file extent item points to the shared extent,
   with a data offset of 64K, we issue a clone operation with a source
   range starting at file offset 1856K, which matches the file extent
   item's offset, 1M, plus the amount of data cloned and written so far,
   which is 64K (step 2) + 128K (step 3) + 640K (step 4). This clone
   operation is invalid since the source range offset matches the current
   eof of the file in the receiver. We should have stopped looking for
   extents to clone at this point and instead fallback to write, which
   would simply the contain the data in the file range from 1856K to
   1856K + 128K.

So fix this by stopping the loop that looks for file ranges to clone at
clone_range() when we reach the current eof of the file being processed,
if we are cloning from the same file and using the send root as the clone
root. This ensures any data not yet cloned will be sent to the receiver
through a write operation.

A test case for fstests will follow soon.

Reported-by: Massimo B. <massimo.b@gmx.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/6ae34776e85912960a253a8327068a892998e685.camel@gmx.net/
Fixes: 11f2069c113e ("Btrfs: send, allow clone operations within the same file")
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.5+
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
btrfs: don't clear ret in btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups 2021-01-27T10:47:40+00:00 Josef Bacik josef@toxicpanda.com 2020-12-16T16:22:17+00:00 4d1cf8eeda5b3f411440d9910a484b1d06484aa7 commit 34d1eb0e599875064955a74712f08ff14c8e3d5f upstream. If we fail to update a block group item in the loop we'll break, however we'll do btrfs_run_delayed_refs and lose our error value in ret, and thus not clean up properly. Fix this by only running the delayed refs if there was no failure. CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.4+ Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 34d1eb0e599875064955a74712f08ff14c8e3d5f upstream.

If we fail to update a block group item in the loop we'll break, however
we'll do btrfs_run_delayed_refs and lose our error value in ret, and
thus not clean up properly.  Fix this by only running the delayed refs
if there was no failure.

CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.4+
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
btrfs: fix lockdep splat in btrfs_recover_relocation 2021-01-27T10:47:40+00:00 Josef Bacik josef@toxicpanda.com 2020-12-16T16:22:14+00:00 e1065331b730864b4cee6fbb60e6a1d2f44482c8 commit fb286100974e7239af243bc2255a52f29442f9c8 upstream. While testing the error paths of relocation I hit the following lockdep splat: ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.10.0-rc6+ #217 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ mount/779 is trying to acquire lock: ffffa0e676945418 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 but task is already holding lock: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}: down_read_nested+0x43/0x130 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x31/0x40 btrfs_search_slot+0x462/0x8f0 btrfs_update_root+0x55/0x2b0 btrfs_drop_snapshot+0x398/0x750 clean_dirty_subvols+0xdf/0x120 btrfs_recover_relocation+0x534/0x5a0 btrfs_start_pre_rw_mount+0xcb/0x170 open_ctree+0x151f/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #1 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}: start_transaction+0x444/0x700 insert_balance_item.isra.0+0x37/0x320 btrfs_balance+0x354/0xf40 btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x2cf/0x380 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #0 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &fs_info->balance_mutex --> sb_internal#2 --> btrfs-root-00 Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(sb_internal#2); lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); *** DEADLOCK *** 2 locks held by mount/779: #0: ffffa0e60dc040e0 (&type->s_umount_key#47/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: alloc_super+0xb5/0x380 #1: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 779 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.10.0-rc6+ #217 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x8b/0xb0 check_noncircular+0xcf/0xf0 ? trace_call_bpf+0x139/0x260 __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x2c4/0x2f0 ? btrfs_get_64+0x5e/0x100 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 ? __kmalloc_track_caller+0x2f2/0x320 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 ? capable+0x3a/0x60 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 This is straightforward to fix, simply release the path before we setup the balance_ctl. CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.4+ Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit fb286100974e7239af243bc2255a52f29442f9c8 upstream.

While testing the error paths of relocation I hit the following lockdep
splat:

  ======================================================
  WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
  5.10.0-rc6+ #217 Not tainted
  ------------------------------------------------------
  mount/779 is trying to acquire lock:
  ffffa0e676945418 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340

  but task is already holding lock:
  ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100

  which lock already depends on the new lock.

  the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

  -> #2 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}:
	 down_read_nested+0x43/0x130
	 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100
	 btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x31/0x40
	 btrfs_search_slot+0x462/0x8f0
	 btrfs_update_root+0x55/0x2b0
	 btrfs_drop_snapshot+0x398/0x750
	 clean_dirty_subvols+0xdf/0x120
	 btrfs_recover_relocation+0x534/0x5a0
	 btrfs_start_pre_rw_mount+0xcb/0x170
	 open_ctree+0x151f/0x1726
	 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea
	 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
	 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
	 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0
	 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380
	 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
	 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
	 path_mount+0x433/0xc10
	 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120
	 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #1 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}:
	 start_transaction+0x444/0x700
	 insert_balance_item.isra.0+0x37/0x320
	 btrfs_balance+0x354/0xf40
	 btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x2cf/0x380
	 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0
	 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  -> #0 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
	 __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10
	 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370
	 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0
	 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340
	 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726
	 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea
	 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
	 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
	 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0
	 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380
	 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
	 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
	 path_mount+0x433/0xc10
	 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120
	 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
	 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

  other info that might help us debug this:

  Chain exists of:
    &fs_info->balance_mutex --> sb_internal#2 --> btrfs-root-00

   Possible unsafe locking scenario:

	 CPU0                    CPU1
	 ----                    ----
    lock(btrfs-root-00);
				 lock(sb_internal#2);
				 lock(btrfs-root-00);
    lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex);

   *** DEADLOCK ***

  2 locks held by mount/779:
   #0: ffffa0e60dc040e0 (&type->s_umount_key#47/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: alloc_super+0xb5/0x380
   #1: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100

  stack backtrace:
  CPU: 0 PID: 779 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.10.0-rc6+ #217
  Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
  Call Trace:
   dump_stack+0x8b/0xb0
   check_noncircular+0xcf/0xf0
   ? trace_call_bpf+0x139/0x260
   __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10
   lock_acquire+0x116/0x370
   ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340
   __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0
   ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340
   ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340
   ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80
   ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x2c4/0x2f0
   ? btrfs_get_64+0x5e/0x100
   btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340
   open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726
   btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea
   ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80
   legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
   vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
   vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0
   btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380
   ? __kmalloc_track_caller+0x2f2/0x320
   legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
   vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
   ? capable+0x3a/0x60
   path_mount+0x433/0xc10
   __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120
   do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

This is straightforward to fix, simply release the path before we setup
the balance_ctl.

CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.4+
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
btrfs: don't get an EINTR during drop_snapshot for reloc 2021-01-27T10:47:40+00:00 Josef Bacik josef@toxicpanda.com 2020-12-16T16:22:05+00:00 68718453159ef860c067c7e326282a23379c0a45 commit 18d3bff411c8d46d40537483bdc0b61b33ce0371 upstream. This was partially fixed by f3e3d9cc3525 ("btrfs: avoid possible signal interruption of btrfs_drop_snapshot() on relocation tree"), however it missed a spot when we restart a trans handle because we need to end the transaction. The fix is the same, simply use btrfs_join_transaction() instead of btrfs_start_transaction() when deleting reloc roots. Fixes: f3e3d9cc3525 ("btrfs: avoid possible signal interruption of btrfs_drop_snapshot() on relocation tree") CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.4+ Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 18d3bff411c8d46d40537483bdc0b61b33ce0371 upstream.

This was partially fixed by f3e3d9cc3525 ("btrfs: avoid possible signal
interruption of btrfs_drop_snapshot() on relocation tree"), however it
missed a spot when we restart a trans handle because we need to end the
transaction.  The fix is the same, simply use btrfs_join_transaction()
instead of btrfs_start_transaction() when deleting reloc roots.

Fixes: f3e3d9cc3525 ("btrfs: avoid possible signal interruption of btrfs_drop_snapshot() on relocation tree")
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.4+
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
nfsd4: readdirplus shouldn't return parent of export 2021-01-23T14:57:56+00:00 J. Bruce Fields bfields@redhat.com 2021-01-11T21:01:29+00:00 4aef760c28e8bd1860a27fd78067b4ea77124987 commit 51b2ee7d006a736a9126e8111d1f24e4fd0afaa6 upstream. If you export a subdirectory of a filesystem, a READDIRPLUS on the root of that export will return the filehandle of the parent with the ".." entry. The filehandle is optional, so let's just not return the filehandle for ".." if we're at the root of an export. Note that once the client learns one filehandle outside of the export, they can trivially access the rest of the export using further lookups. However, it is also not very difficult to guess filehandles outside of the export. So exporting a subdirectory of a filesystem should considered equivalent to providing access to the entire filesystem. To avoid confusion, we recommend only exporting entire filesystems. Reported-by: Youjipeng <wangzhibei1999@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 51b2ee7d006a736a9126e8111d1f24e4fd0afaa6 upstream.

If you export a subdirectory of a filesystem, a READDIRPLUS on the root
of that export will return the filehandle of the parent with the ".."
entry.

The filehandle is optional, so let's just not return the filehandle for
".." if we're at the root of an export.

Note that once the client learns one filehandle outside of the export,
they can trivially access the rest of the export using further lookups.

However, it is also not very difficult to guess filehandles outside of
the export.  So exporting a subdirectory of a filesystem should
considered equivalent to providing access to the entire filesystem.  To
avoid confusion, we recommend only exporting entire filesystems.

Reported-by: Youjipeng <wangzhibei1999@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
ext4: fix superblock checksum failure when setting password salt 2021-01-19T17:26:17+00:00 Jan Kara jack@suse.cz 2020-12-16T10:18:43+00:00 986fdc7685fab266949e800e89a9212d32946083 commit dfd56c2c0c0dbb11be939b804ddc8d5395ab3432 upstream. When setting password salt in the superblock, we forget to recompute the superblock checksum so it will not match until the next superblock modification which recomputes the checksum. Fix it. CC: Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@google.com> Reported-by: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca> Fixes: 9bd8212f981e ("ext4 crypto: add encryption policy and password salt support") Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201216101844.22917-8-jack@suse.cz Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit dfd56c2c0c0dbb11be939b804ddc8d5395ab3432 upstream.

When setting password salt in the superblock, we forget to recompute the
superblock checksum so it will not match until the next superblock
modification which recomputes the checksum. Fix it.

CC: Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@google.com>
Reported-by: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>
Fixes: 9bd8212f981e ("ext4 crypto: add encryption policy and password salt support")
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201216101844.22917-8-jack@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
NFS: nfs_igrab_and_active must first reference the superblock 2021-01-19T17:26:17+00:00 Trond Myklebust trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com 2021-01-10T20:58:08+00:00 38992092b54e3f3847a102087c946fea8f15280c commit 896567ee7f17a8a736cda8a28cc987228410a2ac upstream. Before referencing the inode, we must ensure that the superblock can be referenced. Otherwise, we can end up with iput() calling superblock operations that are no longer valid or accessible. Fixes: ea7c38fef0b7 ("NFSv4: Ensure we reference the inode for return-on-close in delegreturn") Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 896567ee7f17a8a736cda8a28cc987228410a2ac upstream.

Before referencing the inode, we must ensure that the superblock can be
referenced. Otherwise, we can end up with iput() calling superblock
operations that are no longer valid or accessible.

Fixes: ea7c38fef0b7 ("NFSv4: Ensure we reference the inode for return-on-close in delegreturn")
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
NFS/pNFS: Fix a leak of the layout 'plh_outstanding' counter 2021-01-19T17:26:17+00:00 Trond Myklebust trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com 2021-01-06T19:13:22+00:00 6b3ae2030db9a3ee058906a1be342a12684b6c4e commit cb2856c5971723910a86b7d1d0cf623d6919cbc4 upstream. If we exit _lgopen_prepare_attached() without setting a layout, we will currently leak the plh_outstanding counter. Fixes: 411ae722d10a ("pNFS: Wait for stale layoutget calls to complete in pnfs_update_layout()") Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit cb2856c5971723910a86b7d1d0cf623d6919cbc4 upstream.

If we exit _lgopen_prepare_attached() without setting a layout, we will
currently leak the plh_outstanding counter.

Fixes: 411ae722d10a ("pNFS: Wait for stale layoutget calls to complete in pnfs_update_layout()")
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
pNFS: Stricter ordering of layoutget and layoutreturn 2021-01-19T17:26:17+00:00 Trond Myklebust trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com 2021-01-05T11:43:45+00:00 aa2399f55eff4ec78330bb6fe55f9df53e5cae0c commit 2c8d5fc37fe2384a9bdb6965443ab9224d46f704 upstream. If a layout return is in progress, we should wait for it to complete, in case the layout segment we are picking up gets returned too. Fixes: 30cb3ee299cb ("pNFS: Handle NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID on layoutreturn by bumping the state seqid") Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 2c8d5fc37fe2384a9bdb6965443ab9224d46f704 upstream.

If a layout return is in progress, we should wait for it to complete,
in case the layout segment we are picking up gets returned too.

Fixes: 30cb3ee299cb ("pNFS: Handle NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID on layoutreturn by bumping the state seqid")
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>