From nobody Fri Oct 18 06:14:12 2024 Received: from out-180.mta1.migadu.com (out-180.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A471215EFB6 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 16:11:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.180 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721837507; cv=none; b=W8FUzKnX67ys8OoGXsgenQpQ+/+4sPYzZiqkXDd01nBfCVcLMs/i7jFauyk1SRUFi0UZvR/gu8pMB8mt7N1N23X7501KJpCruhQpcvs43uqQWdYlwGCVKjZpfzk24iLMWC+hHXf+iX7+JR+TmCh4t6w/Ls5GUFhDoAsMNnSiu7U= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721837507; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2GrkRhx6WfzVuCpgridw5t0qCBlsL72XRCyejH/kB7U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=L4VlkX7RWY5vIKvAtOCp/8VcgpGbONl2yxSWAwGem/822+WPUJAb+ZYN01s7EgAd5j0NG9eqYIlyfJHx2tHm5amh49QXT0HebzNZxMvTJpL6c64IsDVEKstUa1+PAPd4qFROVBhSDOfe3IfmQ6qZUU86GiSbz9NtaDQm8MlgFSk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=IGhhzLeB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.180 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="IGhhzLeB" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1721837503; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/BDPm85vZLWwDNWMf6v7cx0P2QLlbAt6JaKMTa1F2O0=; b=IGhhzLeBZCT/nVsThapj9kAOFP2QUqLbbx4gYl8DoHfLvwpTopCySdpFuFp1Aew7UOH8ZZ yw8pQ9DsZ61AHJW2mK4nn/97L8x/v+oDYUWyY8XJ8huECHtkJ91259LO4agsMiSmcXkh3D p5adugCc/mRQ6uHoGahaw5wD0N5cUgo= From: "Luis Henriques (SUSE)" To: Theodore Ts'o , Andreas Dilger , Jan Kara , Harshad Shirwadkar Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Luis Henriques (SUSE)" Subject: [PATCH v2 4/4] ext4: fix incorrect tid assumption in ext4_fc_mark_ineligible() Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 17:11:18 +0100 Message-ID: <20240724161119.13448-5-luis.henriques@linux.dev> In-Reply-To: <20240724161119.13448-1-luis.henriques@linux.dev> References: <20240724161119.13448-1-luis.henriques@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Function jbd2_journal_shrink_checkpoint_list() assumes that '0' is not a valid value for transaction IDs, which is incorrect. Furthermore, the sbi->s_fc_ineligible_tid handling also makes the same assumption by being initialised to '0'. Fortunately, the sb flag EXT4_MF_FC_INELIGIBLE can be used to check whether sbi->s_fc_ineligible_tid has been previously set instead of comparing it with '0'. Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques (SUSE) Reviewed-by: Jan Kara --- fs/ext4/fast_commit.c | 15 +++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c b/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c index 3926a05eceee..6f4c97bdb2d8 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c +++ b/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c @@ -339,22 +339,29 @@ void ext4_fc_mark_ineligible(struct super_block *sb, = int reason, handle_t *handl { struct ext4_sb_info *sbi =3D EXT4_SB(sb); tid_t tid; + bool has_transaction =3D true; + bool is_ineligible; =20 if (ext4_fc_disabled(sb)) return; =20 - ext4_set_mount_flag(sb, EXT4_MF_FC_INELIGIBLE); if (handle && !IS_ERR(handle)) tid =3D handle->h_transaction->t_tid; else { read_lock(&sbi->s_journal->j_state_lock); - tid =3D sbi->s_journal->j_running_transaction ? - sbi->s_journal->j_running_transaction->t_tid : 0; + if (sbi->s_journal->j_running_transaction) + tid =3D sbi->s_journal->j_running_transaction->t_tid; + else + has_transaction =3D false; read_unlock(&sbi->s_journal->j_state_lock); } spin_lock(&sbi->s_fc_lock); - if (tid_gt(tid, sbi->s_fc_ineligible_tid)) + is_ineligible =3D ext4_test_mount_flag(sb, EXT4_MF_FC_INELIGIBLE); + if (has_transaction && + (!is_ineligible || + (is_ineligible && tid_gt(tid, sbi->s_fc_ineligible_tid)))) sbi->s_fc_ineligible_tid =3D tid; + ext4_set_mount_flag(sb, EXT4_MF_FC_INELIGIBLE); spin_unlock(&sbi->s_fc_lock); WARN_ON(reason >=3D EXT4_FC_REASON_MAX); sbi->s_fc_stats.fc_ineligible_reason_count[reason]++;