Hello,
attached patch should fix the following race:
Proc 1 Proc 2
__flush_batch()
ll_rw_block()
do_get_write_access()
lock_buffer
jh is only waiting for checkpoint
-> b_transaction == NULL ->
do nothing
unlock_buffer
test_set_buffer_locked()
test_clear_buffer_dirty()
__journal_file_buffer()
change the data
submit_bh()
and we have sent wrong data to disk... We now clean the dirty buffer
flag under buffer lock in all cases and hence we know that whenever a buffer
is starting to be journaled we either finish the pending write-out
before attaching a buffer to a transaction or we won't write the buffer
until the transaction is going to be committed... Please apply.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SuSE CR Labs
The test in jbd_unexpected_dirty_buffer() is redundant - remove it.
Furthermore we have to clear the buffer dirty bit under the buffer lock
to prevent races with buffer write-out (and hence prevent returning
a buffer with IO happening).
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
diff -rupX /home/jack/.kerndiffexclude linux-2.6.12-2-ll_rw_block-fix/fs/jbd/transaction.c linux-2.6.12-3-early-writeout-fix/fs/jbd/transaction.c
--- linux-2.6.12-2-ll_rw_block-fix/fs/jbd/transaction.c 2005-06-28 13:26:18.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.12-3-early-writeout-fix/fs/jbd/transaction.c 2005-07-09 08:40:01.000000000 +0200
@@ -493,20 +493,17 @@ static void jbd_unexpected_dirty_buffer(
struct buffer_head *bh = jh2bh(jh);
int jlist;
- if (buffer_dirty(bh)) {
- /* If this buffer is one which might reasonably be dirty
- * --- ie. data, or not part of this journal --- then
- * we're OK to leave it alone, but otherwise we need to
- * move the dirty bit to the journal's own internal
- * JBDDirty bit. */
- jlist = jh->b_jlist;
-
- if (jlist == BJ_Metadata || jlist == BJ_Reserved ||
- jlist == BJ_Shadow || jlist == BJ_Forget) {
- if (test_clear_buffer_dirty(jh2bh(jh))) {
- set_bit(BH_JBDDirty, &jh2bh(jh)->b_state);
- }
- }
+ /* If this buffer is one which might reasonably be dirty
+ * --- ie. data, or not part of this journal --- then
+ * we're OK to leave it alone, but otherwise we need to
+ * move the dirty bit to the journal's own internal
+ * JBDDirty bit. */
+ jlist = jh->b_jlist;
+
+ if (jlist == BJ_Metadata || jlist == BJ_Reserved ||
+ jlist == BJ_Shadow || jlist == BJ_Forget) {
+ if (test_clear_buffer_dirty(jh2bh(jh)))
+ set_bit(BH_JBDDirty, &jh2bh(jh)->b_state);
}
}
@@ -574,9 +571,14 @@ repeat:
if (jh->b_next_transaction)
J_ASSERT_JH(jh, jh->b_next_transaction ==
transaction);
- JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "Unexpected dirty buffer");
- jbd_unexpected_dirty_buffer(jh);
- }
+ }
+ /*
+ * In any case we need to clean the dirty flag and we must
+ * do it under the buffer lock to be sure we don't race
+ * with running write-out.
+ */
+ JBUFFER_TRACE(jh, "Unexpected dirty buffer");
+ jbd_unexpected_dirty_buffer(jh);
}
unlock_buffer(bh);
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |