On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 17:12 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Badari Pulavarty wrote:
> >
> > I have been running into following bug while running fsx
> > tests on 1k (ext3) filesystem all the time.
> >
> > ----------- [cut here ] --------- [please bite here ] ---------
> > Kernel BUG at fs/buffer.c:2791
> > invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
> >
> > Its complaining about BUG_ON(!buffer_mapped(bh)).
> >
> > It was hard to track it down, needed lots of debug - but here
> > is the problem & fix. Since the fix is in __set_page_buffer_dirty()
> > code - I am wondering how it would effect others :(
>
> This will breaks NTFS and probably a lot of other file systems I would
> think.
Well, it can happen only with fileystems with blocksize < pagesize.
So, that should limit the scope :)
>
> For example all buffer based file systems in their writepage
> implementations will create buffers if none are present and those will not
> be mapped. If for whatever reason writepage now breaks out before mapping
> the buffers (e.g. because the buffers do not need to be written or due to
> an error) you are left with a page containing unmapped buffers.
>
> Then a page dirty comes in caused by a mmapped write for example.
>
> __set_page_dirty_bufferes() runs by default and with your patch does not
> set the unmapped buffers dirty thus they never get written out and you
> have data corruption.
I was wondering, is it *okay* to have a dirty buffer but not mapped to
disk ? I guess, so ..
>
> It is the caller of submit_bh() that is doing the stupidity of submitting
> unmapped buffers for i/o or even the caller of the caller, etc...
> Somewhere up in that chain buffers should have been mapped before being
> submitted for i/o otherwise it is a BUG() (as correctly identified by
> submit_bh()).
>
> Perhaps the real fix is not to have ext3 use ll_rw_block() and instead
> make it use submit_bh() directly and only submit buffers inside the file
> size and/or make it map buffers before calling ll_rw_block() and if they
> are outside the file size just clean them without submitting them...
Yeah. I considered doing it in ll_rw_block() - but then I thought
fixing it in set_page_buffer_dirty() may be a valid fix :(
Let me try other options, then.
Thanks,
Badari
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
