btrfs: add an inode-item.h

We have a few helpers in inode-item.c, and I'm going to make a few
changes to how we do truncate in the future, so break out these
definitions into their own header file t

btrfs: add an inode-item.h

We have a few helpers in inode-item.c, and I'm going to make a few
changes to how we do truncate in the future, so break out these
definitions into their own header file to trim down ctree.h some and
make it easier to do the work on truncate in the future.

Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: make send work with concurrent block group relocation

We don't allow send and balance/relocation to run in parallel in order
to prevent send failing or silently producing some bad stream. Thi

btrfs: make send work with concurrent block group relocation

We don't allow send and balance/relocation to run in parallel in order
to prevent send failing or silently producing some bad stream. This is
because while send is using an extent (specially metadata) or about to
read a metadata extent and expecting it belongs to a specific parent
node, relocation can run, the transaction used for the relocation is
committed and the extent gets reallocated while send is still using the
extent, so it ends up with a different content than expected. This can
result in just failing to read a metadata extent due to failure of the
validation checks (parent transid, level, etc), failure to find a
backreference for a data extent, and other unexpected failures. Besides
reallocation, there's also a similar problem of an extent getting
discarded when it's unpinned after the transaction used for block group
relocation is committed.

The restriction between balance and send was added in commit 9e967495e0e0
("Btrfs: prevent send failures and crashes due to concurrent relocation"),
kernel 5.3, while the more general restriction between send and relocation
was added in commit 1cea5cf0e664 ("btrfs: ensure relocation never runs
while we have send operations running"), kernel 5.14.

Both send and relocation can be very long running operations. Relocation
because it has to do a lot of IO and expensive backreference lookups in
case there are many snapshots, and send due to read IO when operating on
very large trees. This makes it inconvenient for users and tools to deal
with scheduling both operations.

For zoned filesystem we also have automatic block group relocation, so
send can fail with -EAGAIN when users least expect it or send can end up
delaying the block group relocation for too long. In the future we might
also get the automatic block group relocation for non zoned filesystems.

This change makes it possible for send and relocation to run in parallel.
This is achieved the following way:

1) For all tree searches, send acquires a read lock on the commit root
semaphore;

2) After each tree search, and before releasing the commit root semaphore,
the leaf is cloned and placed in the search path (struct btrfs_path);

3) After releasing the commit root semaphore, the changed_cb() callback
is invoked, which operates on the leaf and writes commands to the pipe
(or file in case send/receive is not used with a pipe). It's important
here to not hold a lock on the commit root semaphore, because if we did
we could deadlock when sending and receiving to the same filesystem
using a pipe - the send task blocks on the pipe because it's full, the
receive task, which is the only consumer of the pipe, triggers a
transaction commit when attempting to create a subvolume or reserve
space for a write operation for example, but the transaction commit
blocks trying to write lock the commit root semaphore, resulting in a
deadlock;

4) Before moving to the next key, or advancing to the next change in case
of an incremental send, check if a transaction used for relocation was
committed (or is about to finish its commit). If so, release the search
path(s) and restart the search, to where we were before, so that we
don't operate on stale extent buffers. The search restarts are always
possible because both the send and parent roots are RO, and no one can
add, remove of update keys (change their offset) in RO trees - the
only exception is deduplication, but that is still not allowed to run
in parallel with send;

5) Periodically check if there is contention on the commit root semaphore,
which means there is a transaction commit trying to write lock it, and
release the semaphore and reschedule if there is contention, so as to
avoid causing any significant delays to transaction commits.

This leaves some room for optimizations for send to have less path
releases and re searching the trees when there's relocation running, but
for now it's kept simple as it performs quite well (on very large trees
with resulting send streams in the order of a few hundred gigabytes).

Test case btrfs/187, from fstests, stresses relocation, send and
deduplication attempting to run in parallel, but without verifying if send
succeeds and if it produces correct streams. A new test case will be added
that exercises relocation happening in parallel with send and then checks
that send succeeds and the resulting streams are correct.

A final note is that for now this still leaves the mutual exclusion
between send operations and deduplication on files belonging to a root
used by send operations. A solution for that will be slightly more complex
but it will eventually be built on top of this change.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: stop accessing ->csum_root directly

We are going to have multiple csum roots in the future, so convert all
users of ->csum_root to btrfs_csum_root() and rename ->csum_root to
->_csum_root so

btrfs: stop accessing ->csum_root directly

We are going to have multiple csum roots in the future, so convert all
users of ->csum_root to btrfs_csum_root() and rename ->csum_root to
->_csum_root so we can easily find remaining users in the future.

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: stop accessing ->extent_root directly

When we start having multiple extent roots we'll need to use a helper to
get to the correct extent_root. Rename fs_info->extent_root to
_extent_root and

btrfs: stop accessing ->extent_root directly

When we start having multiple extent roots we'll need to use a helper to
get to the correct extent_root. Rename fs_info->extent_root to
_extent_root and convert all of the users of the extent root to using
the btrfs_extent_root() helper. This will allow us to easily clean up
the remaining direct accesses in the future.

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: change root to fs_info for btrfs_reserve_metadata_bytes

We used to need the root for btrfs_reserve_metadata_bytes to check the
orphan cleanup state, but we no longer need that, we simply need

btrfs: change root to fs_info for btrfs_reserve_metadata_bytes

We used to need the root for btrfs_reserve_metadata_bytes to check the
orphan cleanup state, but we no longer need that, we simply need the
fs_info. Change btrfs_reserve_metadata_bytes() to use the fs_info, and
change both btrfs_block_rsv_refill() and btrfs_block_rsv_add() to do the
same as they simply call btrfs_reserve_metadata_bytes() and then
manipulate the block_rsv that is being used.

Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: drop the _nr from the item helpers

Now that all call sites are using the slot number to modify item values,
rename the SETGET helpers to raw_item_*(), and then rework the _nr()
helpers to be

btrfs: drop the _nr from the item helpers

Now that all call sites are using the slot number to modify item values,
rename the SETGET helpers to raw_item_*(), and then rework the _nr()
helpers to be the btrfs_item_*() btrfs_set_item_*() helpers, and then
rename all of the callers to the new helpers.

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: fix deadlock between chunk allocation and chunk btree modifications

When a task is doing some modification to the chunk btree and it is not in
the context of a chunk allocation or a chunk rem

btrfs: fix deadlock between chunk allocation and chunk btree modifications

When a task is doing some modification to the chunk btree and it is not in
the context of a chunk allocation or a chunk removal, it can deadlock with
another task that is currently allocating a new data or metadata chunk.

These contexts are the following:

* When relocating a system chunk, when we need to COW the extent buffers
that belong to the chunk btree;

* When adding a new device (ioctl), where we need to add a new device item
to the chunk btree;

* When removing a device (ioctl), where we need to remove a device item
from the chunk btree;

* When resizing a device (ioctl), where we need to update a device item in
the chunk btree and may need to relocate a system chunk that lies beyond
the new device size when shrinking a device.

The problem happens due to a sequence of steps like the following:

1) Task A starts a data or metadata chunk allocation and it locks the
chunk mutex;

2) Task B is relocating a system chunk, and when it needs to COW an extent
buffer of the chunk btree, it has locked both that extent buffer as
well as its parent extent buffer;

3) Since there is not enough available system space, either because none
of the existing system block groups have enough free space or because
the only one with enough free space is in RO mode due to the relocation,
task B triggers a new system chunk allocation. It blocks when trying to
acquire the chunk mutex, currently held by task A;

4) Task A enters btrfs_chunk_alloc_add_chunk_item(), in order to insert
the new chunk item into the chunk btree and update the existing device
items there. But in order to do that, it has to lock the extent buffer
that task B locked at step 2, or its parent extent buffer, but task B
is waiting on the chunk mutex, which is currently locked by task A,
therefore resulting in a deadlock.

One example report when the deadlock happens with system chunk relocation:

INFO: task kworker/u9:5:546 blocked for more than 143 seconds.
Not tainted 5.15.0-rc3+ #1
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:kworker/u9:5 state:D stack:25936 pid: 546 ppid: 2 flags:0x00004000
Workqueue: events_unbound btrfs_async_reclaim_metadata_space
Call Trace:
context_switch kernel/sched/core.c:4940 [inline]
__schedule+0xcd9/0x2530 kernel/sched/core.c:6287
schedule+0xd3/0x270 kernel/sched/core.c:6366
rwsem_down_read_slowpath+0x4ee/0x9d0 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:993
__down_read_common kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1214 [inline]
__down_read kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1223 [inline]
down_read_nested+0xe6/0x440 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1590
__btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x31/0x350 fs/btrfs/locking.c:47
btrfs_tree_read_lock fs/btrfs/locking.c:54 [inline]
btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x8a/0x320 fs/btrfs/locking.c:191
btrfs_search_slot_get_root fs/btrfs/ctree.c:1623 [inline]
btrfs_search_slot+0x13b4/0x2140 fs/btrfs/ctree.c:1728
btrfs_update_device+0x11f/0x500 fs/btrfs/volumes.c:2794
btrfs_chunk_alloc_add_chunk_item+0x34d/0xea0 fs/btrfs/volumes.c:5504
do_chunk_alloc fs/btrfs/block-group.c:3408 [inline]
btrfs_chunk_alloc+0x84d/0xf50 fs/btrfs/block-group.c:3653
flush_space+0x54e/0xd80 fs/btrfs/space-info.c:670
btrfs_async_reclaim_metadata_space+0x396/0xa90 fs/btrfs/space-info.c:953
process_one_work+0x9df/0x16d0 kernel/workqueue.c:2297
worker_thread+0x90/0xed0 kernel/workqueue.c:2444
kthread+0x3e5/0x4d0 kernel/kthread.c:319
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:295
INFO: task syz-executor:9107 blocked for more than 143 seconds.
Not tainted 5.15.0-rc3+ #1
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:syz-executor state:D stack:23200 pid: 9107 ppid: 7792 flags:0x00004004
Call Trace:
context_switch kernel/sched/core.c:4940 [inline]
__schedule+0xcd9/0x2530 kernel/sched/core.c:6287
schedule+0xd3/0x270 kernel/sched/core.c:6366
schedule_preempt_disabled+0xf/0x20 kernel/sched/core.c:6425
__mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:669 [inline]
__mutex_lock+0xc96/0x1680 kernel/locking/mutex.c:729
btrfs_chunk_alloc+0x31a/0xf50 fs/btrfs/block-group.c:3631
find_free_extent_update_loop fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:3986 [inline]
find_free_extent+0x25cb/0x3a30 fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4335
btrfs_reserve_extent+0x1f1/0x500 fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4415
btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x203/0x1120 fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4813
__btrfs_cow_block+0x412/0x1620 fs/btrfs/ctree.c:415
btrfs_cow_block+0x2f6/0x8c0 fs/btrfs/ctree.c:570
btrfs_search_slot+0x1094/0x2140 fs/btrfs/ctree.c:1768
relocate_tree_block fs/btrfs/relocation.c:2694 [inline]
relocate_tree_blocks+0xf73/0x1770 fs/btrfs/relocation.c:2757
relocate_block_group+0x47e/0xc70 fs/btrfs/relocation.c:3673
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x48a/0xc60 fs/btrfs/relocation.c:4070
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x96/0x280 fs/btrfs/volumes.c:3181
__btrfs_balance fs/btrfs/volumes.c:3911 [inline]
btrfs_balance+0x1f03/0x3cd0 fs/btrfs/volumes.c:4301
btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x61e/0x800 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:4137
btrfs_ioctl+0x39ea/0x7b70 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:4949
vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
__do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:874 [inline]
__se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:860 [inline]
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x193/0x200 fs/ioctl.c:860
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0x35/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae

So fix this by making sure that whenever we try to modify the chunk btree
and we are neither in a chunk allocation context nor in a chunk remove
context, we reserve system space before modifying the chunk btree.

Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/CACkBjsax51i4mu6C0C3vJqQN3NR_iVuucoeG3U1HXjrgzn5FFQ@mail.gmail.com/
Fixes: 79bd37120b1495 ("btrfs: rework chunk allocation to avoid exhaustion of the system chunk array")
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.14+
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: pull up qgroup checks from delayed-ref core to init time

Instead of checking whether qgroup processing for a dealyed ref has to
happen in the core of delayed ref, simply pull the check at ini

btrfs: pull up qgroup checks from delayed-ref core to init time

Instead of checking whether qgroup processing for a dealyed ref has to
happen in the core of delayed ref, simply pull the check at init time of
respective delayed ref structures. This eliminates the final use of
real_root in delayed-ref core paving the way to making this member
optional.

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: add additional parameters to btrfs_init_tree_ref/btrfs_init_data_ref

In order to make 'real_root' used only in ref-verify it's required to
have the necessary context to perform the same check

btrfs: add additional parameters to btrfs_init_tree_ref/btrfs_init_data_ref

In order to make 'real_root' used only in ref-verify it's required to
have the necessary context to perform the same checks that this member
is used for. So add 'mod_root' which will contain the root on behalf of
which a delayed ref was created and a 'skip_group' parameter which
will contain callsite-specific override of skip_qgroup.

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: rename setup_extent_mapping in relocation code

In btrfs code we have two functions called setup_extent_mapping, one in
the extent_map code and one in the relocation code. While both are
priva

btrfs: rename setup_extent_mapping in relocation code

In btrfs code we have two functions called setup_extent_mapping, one in
the extent_map code and one in the relocation code. While both are
private to their respective implementation, this can still be confusing
for the reader.

So rename the version in relocation.c to setup_relocation_extent_mapping.
No functional changes.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: zoned: allow preallocation for relocation inodes

Now that we use a dedicated block group and regular writes for data
relocation, we can preallocate the space needed for a relocated inode,
jus

btrfs: zoned: allow preallocation for relocation inodes

Now that we use a dedicated block group and regular writes for data
relocation, we can preallocate the space needed for a relocated inode,
just like we do in regular mode.

Essentially this reverts commit 32430c614844 ("btrfs: zoned: enable
relocation on a zoned filesystem") as it is not needed anymore.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: introduce btrfs_is_data_reloc_root

There are several places in our codebase where we check if a root is the
root of the data reloc tree and subsequent patches will introduce more.

Factor out

btrfs: introduce btrfs_is_data_reloc_root

There are several places in our codebase where we check if a root is the
root of the data reloc tree and subsequent patches will introduce more.

Factor out the check into a small helper function instead of open coding
it multiple times.

Reviewed-by: Naohiro Aota <naohiro.aota@wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: zoned: finish relocating block group

We will no longer write to a relocating block group. So, we can finish it
now.

Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota <naohiro.aota@wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: David St

btrfs: zoned: finish relocating block group

We will no longer write to a relocating block group. So, we can finish it
now.

Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota <naohiro.aota@wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

show more ...

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARN

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
btrfs/752500 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff97e1875a97b8 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

but task is already holding lock:
ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_init_new_buffer+0x7d/0x2c0
btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x120/0x3b0
__btrfs_cow_block+0x136/0x600
btrfs_cow_block+0x10b/0x230
btrfs_search_slot+0x53b/0xb70
btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0xa0
__btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x5f/0x280
btrfs_async_run_delayed_root+0x24c/0x290
btrfs_work_helper+0xf2/0x3e0
process_one_work+0x271/0x590
worker_thread+0x52/0x3b0
kthread+0xf0/0x120
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

-> #1 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_search_slot+0x3c3/0xb70
do_relocation+0x10c/0x6b0
relocate_tree_blocks+0x317/0x6d0
relocate_block_group+0x1f1/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

-> #0 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
btrfs-treloc-02#2 --> btrfs-tree-01 --> btrfs-tree-01/1

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-tree-01);
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-treloc-02#2);

*** DEADLOCK ***

7 locks held by btrfs/752500:
#0: ffff97e292fdf460 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_ioctl+0x208/0x2c90
#1: ffff97e284c02050 (&fs_info->reclaim_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_balance+0x55f/0xe40
#2: ffff97e284c00878 (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x236/0x400
#3: ffff97e292fdf650 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: merge_reloc_root+0xef/0x610
#4: ffff97e284c02378 (btrfs_trans_num_writers){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#5: ffff97e284c023a0 (btrfs_trans_num_extwriters){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#6: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 752500 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8+ #775
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
Call Trace:

dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x73
check_noncircular+0xd6/0x100
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
? lock_release+0x137/0x2d0
? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x50
? release_extent_buffer+0x128/0x180
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

This isn't necessarily new, it's just tricky to hit in practice. There
are two competing things going on here. With relocation we create a
snapshot of every fs tree with a reloc tree. Any extent buffers that
get initialized here are initialized with the reloc root lockdep key.
However since it is a snapshot, any blocks that are currently in cache
that originally belonged to the fs tree will have the normal tree
lockdep key set. This creates the lock dependency of

reloc tree -> normal tree

for the extent buffer locking during the first phase of the relocation
as we walk down the reloc root to relocate blocks.

However this is problematic because the final phase of the relocation is
merging the reloc root into the original fs root. This involves
searching down to any keys that exist in the original fs root and then
swapping the relocated block and the original fs root block. We have to
search down to the fs root first, and then go search the reloc root for
the block we need to replace. This creates the dependency of

normal tree -> reloc tree

which is why lockdep complains.

Additionally even if we were to fix this particular mismatch with a
different nesting for the merge case, we're still slotting in a block
that has a owner of the reloc root objectid into a normal tree, so that
block will have its lockdep key set to the tree reloc root, and create a
lockdep splat later on when we wander into that block from the fs root.

Unfortunately the only solution here is to make sure we do not set the
lockdep key to the reloc tree lockdep key normally, and then reset any
blocks we wander into from the reloc root when we're doing the merged.

This solves the problem of having mixed tree reloc keys intermixed with
normal tree keys, and then allows us to make sure in the merge case we
maintain the lock order of

normal tree -> reloc tree

We handle this by setting a bit on the reloc root when we do the search
for the block we want to relocate, and any block we search into or COW
at that point gets set to the reloc tree key. This works correctly
because we only ever COW down to the parent node, so we aren't resetting
the key for the block we're linking into the fs root.

With this patch we no longer have the lockdep splat in btrfs/187.

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: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then
btrfs_relocate_block_group() calls

relocate_block_group()
prepare_to_relocate()
set_reloc_control()

that assigns rc to the variable fs_info->reloc_ctl. When
prepare_to_relocate() returns, it calls

btrfs_commit_transaction()
btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups()
btrfs_alloc_path()
kmem_cache_zalloc()

which may fail for example (or other errors could happen). When the
failure occurs, btrfs_relocate_block_group() detects the error and frees
rc and doesn't set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL. After that, in
btrfs_init_reloc_root(), rc is retrieved from fs_info->reloc_ctl and
then used, which may cause a use-after-free bug.

This possible bug can be triggered by calling btrfs_ioctl_balance()
before calling btrfs_ioctl_defrag().

To fix this possible bug, in prepare_to_relocate(), check if
btrfs_commit_transaction() fails. If the failure occurs,
unset_reloc_control() is called to set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL.

The error log in our fault-injection testing is shown as follows:

[ 58.751070] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.753577] Call Trace:
...
[ 58.755800] kasan_report+0x45/0x60
[ 58.756066] btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
[ 58.757304] record_root_in_trans+0x792/0xa10 [btrfs]
[ 58.757748] btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x463/0x4f0 [btrfs]
[ 58.758231] start_transaction+0x896/0x2950 [btrfs]
[ 58.758661] btrfs_defrag_root+0x250/0xc00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759083] btrfs_ioctl_defrag+0x467/0xa00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759513] btrfs_ioctl+0x3c95/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.768510] Allocated by task 23683:
[ 58.768777] ____kasan_kmalloc+0xb5/0xf0
[ 58.769069] __kmalloc+0x227/0x3d0
[ 58.769325] alloc_reloc_control+0x10a/0x3d0 [btrfs]
[ 58.769755] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x7aa/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.770228] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.770655] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.771071] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.771472] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.771902] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.773337] Freed by task 23683:
...
[ 58.774815] kfree+0xda/0x2b0
[ 58.775038] free_reloc_control+0x1d6/0x220 [btrfs]
[ 58.775465] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x115c/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.775944] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.776369] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.776784] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.777185] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.777621] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...

Reported-by: TOTE Robot <oslab@tsinghua.edu.cn>
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+
Reviewed-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@dorminy.me>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Zixuan Fu <r33s3n6@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

show more ...

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARN

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
btrfs/752500 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff97e1875a97b8 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

but task is already holding lock:
ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_init_new_buffer+0x7d/0x2c0
btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x120/0x3b0
__btrfs_cow_block+0x136/0x600
btrfs_cow_block+0x10b/0x230
btrfs_search_slot+0x53b/0xb70
btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0xa0
__btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x5f/0x280
btrfs_async_run_delayed_root+0x24c/0x290
btrfs_work_helper+0xf2/0x3e0
process_one_work+0x271/0x590
worker_thread+0x52/0x3b0
kthread+0xf0/0x120
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

-> #1 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_search_slot+0x3c3/0xb70
do_relocation+0x10c/0x6b0
relocate_tree_blocks+0x317/0x6d0
relocate_block_group+0x1f1/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

-> #0 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
btrfs-treloc-02#2 --> btrfs-tree-01 --> btrfs-tree-01/1

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-tree-01);
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-treloc-02#2);

*** DEADLOCK ***

7 locks held by btrfs/752500:
#0: ffff97e292fdf460 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_ioctl+0x208/0x2c90
#1: ffff97e284c02050 (&fs_info->reclaim_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_balance+0x55f/0xe40
#2: ffff97e284c00878 (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x236/0x400
#3: ffff97e292fdf650 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: merge_reloc_root+0xef/0x610
#4: ffff97e284c02378 (btrfs_trans_num_writers){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#5: ffff97e284c023a0 (btrfs_trans_num_extwriters){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#6: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 752500 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8+ #775
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
Call Trace:

dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x73
check_noncircular+0xd6/0x100
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
? lock_release+0x137/0x2d0
? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x50
? release_extent_buffer+0x128/0x180
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

This isn't necessarily new, it's just tricky to hit in practice. There
are two competing things going on here. With relocation we create a
snapshot of every fs tree with a reloc tree. Any extent buffers that
get initialized here are initialized with the reloc root lockdep key.
However since it is a snapshot, any blocks that are currently in cache
that originally belonged to the fs tree will have the normal tree
lockdep key set. This creates the lock dependency of

reloc tree -> normal tree

for the extent buffer locking during the first phase of the relocation
as we walk down the reloc root to relocate blocks.

However this is problematic because the final phase of the relocation is
merging the reloc root into the original fs root. This involves
searching down to any keys that exist in the original fs root and then
swapping the relocated block and the original fs root block. We have to
search down to the fs root first, and then go search the reloc root for
the block we need to replace. This creates the dependency of

normal tree -> reloc tree

which is why lockdep complains.

Additionally even if we were to fix this particular mismatch with a
different nesting for the merge case, we're still slotting in a block
that has a owner of the reloc root objectid into a normal tree, so that
block will have its lockdep key set to the tree reloc root, and create a
lockdep splat later on when we wander into that block from the fs root.

Unfortunately the only solution here is to make sure we do not set the
lockdep key to the reloc tree lockdep key normally, and then reset any
blocks we wander into from the reloc root when we're doing the merged.

This solves the problem of having mixed tree reloc keys intermixed with
normal tree keys, and then allows us to make sure in the merge case we
maintain the lock order of

normal tree -> reloc tree

We handle this by setting a bit on the reloc root when we do the search
for the block we want to relocate, and any block we search into or COW
at that point gets set to the reloc tree key. This works correctly
because we only ever COW down to the parent node, so we aren't resetting
the key for the block we're linking into the fs root.

With this patch we no longer have the lockdep splat in btrfs/187.

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: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then
btrfs_relocate_block_group() calls

relocate_block_group()
prepare_to_relocate()
set_reloc_control()

that assigns rc to the variable fs_info->reloc_ctl. When
prepare_to_relocate() returns, it calls

btrfs_commit_transaction()
btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups()
btrfs_alloc_path()
kmem_cache_zalloc()

which may fail for example (or other errors could happen). When the
failure occurs, btrfs_relocate_block_group() detects the error and frees
rc and doesn't set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL. After that, in
btrfs_init_reloc_root(), rc is retrieved from fs_info->reloc_ctl and
then used, which may cause a use-after-free bug.

This possible bug can be triggered by calling btrfs_ioctl_balance()
before calling btrfs_ioctl_defrag().

To fix this possible bug, in prepare_to_relocate(), check if
btrfs_commit_transaction() fails. If the failure occurs,
unset_reloc_control() is called to set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL.

The error log in our fault-injection testing is shown as follows:

[ 58.751070] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.753577] Call Trace:
...
[ 58.755800] kasan_report+0x45/0x60
[ 58.756066] btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
[ 58.757304] record_root_in_trans+0x792/0xa10 [btrfs]
[ 58.757748] btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x463/0x4f0 [btrfs]
[ 58.758231] start_transaction+0x896/0x2950 [btrfs]
[ 58.758661] btrfs_defrag_root+0x250/0xc00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759083] btrfs_ioctl_defrag+0x467/0xa00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759513] btrfs_ioctl+0x3c95/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.768510] Allocated by task 23683:
[ 58.768777] ____kasan_kmalloc+0xb5/0xf0
[ 58.769069] __kmalloc+0x227/0x3d0
[ 58.769325] alloc_reloc_control+0x10a/0x3d0 [btrfs]
[ 58.769755] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x7aa/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.770228] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.770655] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.771071] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.771472] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.771902] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.773337] Freed by task 23683:
...
[ 58.774815] kfree+0xda/0x2b0
[ 58.775038] free_reloc_control+0x1d6/0x220 [btrfs]
[ 58.775465] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x115c/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.775944] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.776369] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.776784] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.777185] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.777621] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...

Reported-by: TOTE Robot <oslab@tsinghua.edu.cn>
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+
Reviewed-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@dorminy.me>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Zixuan Fu <r33s3n6@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

show more ...

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARN

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
btrfs/752500 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff97e1875a97b8 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

but task is already holding lock:
ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_init_new_buffer+0x7d/0x2c0
btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x120/0x3b0
__btrfs_cow_block+0x136/0x600
btrfs_cow_block+0x10b/0x230
btrfs_search_slot+0x53b/0xb70
btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0xa0
__btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x5f/0x280
btrfs_async_run_delayed_root+0x24c/0x290
btrfs_work_helper+0xf2/0x3e0
process_one_work+0x271/0x590
worker_thread+0x52/0x3b0
kthread+0xf0/0x120
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

-> #1 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_search_slot+0x3c3/0xb70
do_relocation+0x10c/0x6b0
relocate_tree_blocks+0x317/0x6d0
relocate_block_group+0x1f1/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

-> #0 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
btrfs-treloc-02#2 --> btrfs-tree-01 --> btrfs-tree-01/1

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-tree-01);
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-treloc-02#2);

*** DEADLOCK ***

7 locks held by btrfs/752500:
#0: ffff97e292fdf460 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_ioctl+0x208/0x2c90
#1: ffff97e284c02050 (&fs_info->reclaim_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_balance+0x55f/0xe40
#2: ffff97e284c00878 (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x236/0x400
#3: ffff97e292fdf650 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: merge_reloc_root+0xef/0x610
#4: ffff97e284c02378 (btrfs_trans_num_writers){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#5: ffff97e284c023a0 (btrfs_trans_num_extwriters){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#6: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 752500 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8+ #775
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
Call Trace:

dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x73
check_noncircular+0xd6/0x100
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
? lock_release+0x137/0x2d0
? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x50
? release_extent_buffer+0x128/0x180
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

This isn't necessarily new, it's just tricky to hit in practice. There
are two competing things going on here. With relocation we create a
snapshot of every fs tree with a reloc tree. Any extent buffers that
get initialized here are initialized with the reloc root lockdep key.
However since it is a snapshot, any blocks that are currently in cache
that originally belonged to the fs tree will have the normal tree
lockdep key set. This creates the lock dependency of

reloc tree -> normal tree

for the extent buffer locking during the first phase of the relocation
as we walk down the reloc root to relocate blocks.

However this is problematic because the final phase of the relocation is
merging the reloc root into the original fs root. This involves
searching down to any keys that exist in the original fs root and then
swapping the relocated block and the original fs root block. We have to
search down to the fs root first, and then go search the reloc root for
the block we need to replace. This creates the dependency of

normal tree -> reloc tree

which is why lockdep complains.

Additionally even if we were to fix this particular mismatch with a
different nesting for the merge case, we're still slotting in a block
that has a owner of the reloc root objectid into a normal tree, so that
block will have its lockdep key set to the tree reloc root, and create a
lockdep splat later on when we wander into that block from the fs root.

Unfortunately the only solution here is to make sure we do not set the
lockdep key to the reloc tree lockdep key normally, and then reset any
blocks we wander into from the reloc root when we're doing the merged.

This solves the problem of having mixed tree reloc keys intermixed with
normal tree keys, and then allows us to make sure in the merge case we
maintain the lock order of

normal tree -> reloc tree

We handle this by setting a bit on the reloc root when we do the search
for the block we want to relocate, and any block we search into or COW
at that point gets set to the reloc tree key. This works correctly
because we only ever COW down to the parent node, so we aren't resetting
the key for the block we're linking into the fs root.

With this patch we no longer have the lockdep splat in btrfs/187.

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: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then
btrfs_relocate_block_group() calls

relocate_block_group()
prepare_to_relocate()
set_reloc_control()

that assigns rc to the variable fs_info->reloc_ctl. When
prepare_to_relocate() returns, it calls

btrfs_commit_transaction()
btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups()
btrfs_alloc_path()
kmem_cache_zalloc()

which may fail for example (or other errors could happen). When the
failure occurs, btrfs_relocate_block_group() detects the error and frees
rc and doesn't set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL. After that, in
btrfs_init_reloc_root(), rc is retrieved from fs_info->reloc_ctl and
then used, which may cause a use-after-free bug.

This possible bug can be triggered by calling btrfs_ioctl_balance()
before calling btrfs_ioctl_defrag().

To fix this possible bug, in prepare_to_relocate(), check if
btrfs_commit_transaction() fails. If the failure occurs,
unset_reloc_control() is called to set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL.

The error log in our fault-injection testing is shown as follows:

[ 58.751070] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.753577] Call Trace:
...
[ 58.755800] kasan_report+0x45/0x60
[ 58.756066] btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
[ 58.757304] record_root_in_trans+0x792/0xa10 [btrfs]
[ 58.757748] btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x463/0x4f0 [btrfs]
[ 58.758231] start_transaction+0x896/0x2950 [btrfs]
[ 58.758661] btrfs_defrag_root+0x250/0xc00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759083] btrfs_ioctl_defrag+0x467/0xa00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759513] btrfs_ioctl+0x3c95/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.768510] Allocated by task 23683:
[ 58.768777] ____kasan_kmalloc+0xb5/0xf0
[ 58.769069] __kmalloc+0x227/0x3d0
[ 58.769325] alloc_reloc_control+0x10a/0x3d0 [btrfs]
[ 58.769755] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x7aa/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.770228] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.770655] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.771071] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.771472] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.771902] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.773337] Freed by task 23683:
...
[ 58.774815] kfree+0xda/0x2b0
[ 58.775038] free_reloc_control+0x1d6/0x220 [btrfs]
[ 58.775465] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x115c/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.775944] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.776369] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.776784] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.777185] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.777621] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...

Reported-by: TOTE Robot <oslab@tsinghua.edu.cn>
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+
Reviewed-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@dorminy.me>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Zixuan Fu <r33s3n6@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

show more ...

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARN

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
btrfs/752500 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff97e1875a97b8 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

but task is already holding lock:
ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_init_new_buffer+0x7d/0x2c0
btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x120/0x3b0
__btrfs_cow_block+0x136/0x600
btrfs_cow_block+0x10b/0x230
btrfs_search_slot+0x53b/0xb70
btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0xa0
__btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x5f/0x280
btrfs_async_run_delayed_root+0x24c/0x290
btrfs_work_helper+0xf2/0x3e0
process_one_work+0x271/0x590
worker_thread+0x52/0x3b0
kthread+0xf0/0x120
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

-> #1 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_search_slot+0x3c3/0xb70
do_relocation+0x10c/0x6b0
relocate_tree_blocks+0x317/0x6d0
relocate_block_group+0x1f1/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

-> #0 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
btrfs-treloc-02#2 --> btrfs-tree-01 --> btrfs-tree-01/1

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-tree-01);
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-treloc-02#2);

*** DEADLOCK ***

7 locks held by btrfs/752500:
#0: ffff97e292fdf460 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_ioctl+0x208/0x2c90
#1: ffff97e284c02050 (&fs_info->reclaim_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_balance+0x55f/0xe40
#2: ffff97e284c00878 (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x236/0x400
#3: ffff97e292fdf650 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: merge_reloc_root+0xef/0x610
#4: ffff97e284c02378 (btrfs_trans_num_writers){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#5: ffff97e284c023a0 (btrfs_trans_num_extwriters){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#6: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 752500 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8+ #775
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
Call Trace:

dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x73
check_noncircular+0xd6/0x100
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
? lock_release+0x137/0x2d0
? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x50
? release_extent_buffer+0x128/0x180
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

This isn't necessarily new, it's just tricky to hit in practice. There
are two competing things going on here. With relocation we create a
snapshot of every fs tree with a reloc tree. Any extent buffers that
get initialized here are initialized with the reloc root lockdep key.
However since it is a snapshot, any blocks that are currently in cache
that originally belonged to the fs tree will have the normal tree
lockdep key set. This creates the lock dependency of

reloc tree -> normal tree

for the extent buffer locking during the first phase of the relocation
as we walk down the reloc root to relocate blocks.

However this is problematic because the final phase of the relocation is
merging the reloc root into the original fs root. This involves
searching down to any keys that exist in the original fs root and then
swapping the relocated block and the original fs root block. We have to
search down to the fs root first, and then go search the reloc root for
the block we need to replace. This creates the dependency of

normal tree -> reloc tree

which is why lockdep complains.

Additionally even if we were to fix this particular mismatch with a
different nesting for the merge case, we're still slotting in a block
that has a owner of the reloc root objectid into a normal tree, so that
block will have its lockdep key set to the tree reloc root, and create a
lockdep splat later on when we wander into that block from the fs root.

Unfortunately the only solution here is to make sure we do not set the
lockdep key to the reloc tree lockdep key normally, and then reset any
blocks we wander into from the reloc root when we're doing the merged.

This solves the problem of having mixed tree reloc keys intermixed with
normal tree keys, and then allows us to make sure in the merge case we
maintain the lock order of

normal tree -> reloc tree

We handle this by setting a bit on the reloc root when we do the search
for the block we want to relocate, and any block we search into or COW
at that point gets set to the reloc tree key. This works correctly
because we only ever COW down to the parent node, so we aren't resetting
the key for the block we're linking into the fs root.

With this patch we no longer have the lockdep splat in btrfs/187.

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: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then
btrfs_relocate_block_group() calls

relocate_block_group()
prepare_to_relocate()
set_reloc_control()

that assigns rc to the variable fs_info->reloc_ctl. When
prepare_to_relocate() returns, it calls

btrfs_commit_transaction()
btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups()
btrfs_alloc_path()
kmem_cache_zalloc()

which may fail for example (or other errors could happen). When the
failure occurs, btrfs_relocate_block_group() detects the error and frees
rc and doesn't set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL. After that, in
btrfs_init_reloc_root(), rc is retrieved from fs_info->reloc_ctl and
then used, which may cause a use-after-free bug.

This possible bug can be triggered by calling btrfs_ioctl_balance()
before calling btrfs_ioctl_defrag().

To fix this possible bug, in prepare_to_relocate(), check if
btrfs_commit_transaction() fails. If the failure occurs,
unset_reloc_control() is called to set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL.

The error log in our fault-injection testing is shown as follows:

[ 58.751070] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.753577] Call Trace:
...
[ 58.755800] kasan_report+0x45/0x60
[ 58.756066] btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
[ 58.757304] record_root_in_trans+0x792/0xa10 [btrfs]
[ 58.757748] btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x463/0x4f0 [btrfs]
[ 58.758231] start_transaction+0x896/0x2950 [btrfs]
[ 58.758661] btrfs_defrag_root+0x250/0xc00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759083] btrfs_ioctl_defrag+0x467/0xa00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759513] btrfs_ioctl+0x3c95/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.768510] Allocated by task 23683:
[ 58.768777] ____kasan_kmalloc+0xb5/0xf0
[ 58.769069] __kmalloc+0x227/0x3d0
[ 58.769325] alloc_reloc_control+0x10a/0x3d0 [btrfs]
[ 58.769755] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x7aa/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.770228] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.770655] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.771071] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.771472] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.771902] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.773337] Freed by task 23683:
...
[ 58.774815] kfree+0xda/0x2b0
[ 58.775038] free_reloc_control+0x1d6/0x220 [btrfs]
[ 58.775465] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x115c/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.775944] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.776369] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.776784] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.777185] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.777621] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...

Reported-by: TOTE Robot <oslab@tsinghua.edu.cn>
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+
Reviewed-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@dorminy.me>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Zixuan Fu <r33s3n6@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

show more ...

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARN

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
btrfs/752500 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff97e1875a97b8 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

but task is already holding lock:
ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_init_new_buffer+0x7d/0x2c0
btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x120/0x3b0
__btrfs_cow_block+0x136/0x600
btrfs_cow_block+0x10b/0x230
btrfs_search_slot+0x53b/0xb70
btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0xa0
__btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x5f/0x280
btrfs_async_run_delayed_root+0x24c/0x290
btrfs_work_helper+0xf2/0x3e0
process_one_work+0x271/0x590
worker_thread+0x52/0x3b0
kthread+0xf0/0x120
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

-> #1 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_search_slot+0x3c3/0xb70
do_relocation+0x10c/0x6b0
relocate_tree_blocks+0x317/0x6d0
relocate_block_group+0x1f1/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

-> #0 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
btrfs-treloc-02#2 --> btrfs-tree-01 --> btrfs-tree-01/1

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-tree-01);
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-treloc-02#2);

*** DEADLOCK ***

7 locks held by btrfs/752500:
#0: ffff97e292fdf460 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_ioctl+0x208/0x2c90
#1: ffff97e284c02050 (&fs_info->reclaim_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_balance+0x55f/0xe40
#2: ffff97e284c00878 (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x236/0x400
#3: ffff97e292fdf650 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: merge_reloc_root+0xef/0x610
#4: ffff97e284c02378 (btrfs_trans_num_writers){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#5: ffff97e284c023a0 (btrfs_trans_num_extwriters){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#6: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 752500 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8+ #775
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
Call Trace:

dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x73
check_noncircular+0xd6/0x100
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
? lock_release+0x137/0x2d0
? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x50
? release_extent_buffer+0x128/0x180
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

This isn't necessarily new, it's just tricky to hit in practice. There
are two competing things going on here. With relocation we create a
snapshot of every fs tree with a reloc tree. Any extent buffers that
get initialized here are initialized with the reloc root lockdep key.
However since it is a snapshot, any blocks that are currently in cache
that originally belonged to the fs tree will have the normal tree
lockdep key set. This creates the lock dependency of

reloc tree -> normal tree

for the extent buffer locking during the first phase of the relocation
as we walk down the reloc root to relocate blocks.

However this is problematic because the final phase of the relocation is
merging the reloc root into the original fs root. This involves
searching down to any keys that exist in the original fs root and then
swapping the relocated block and the original fs root block. We have to
search down to the fs root first, and then go search the reloc root for
the block we need to replace. This creates the dependency of

normal tree -> reloc tree

which is why lockdep complains.

Additionally even if we were to fix this particular mismatch with a
different nesting for the merge case, we're still slotting in a block
that has a owner of the reloc root objectid into a normal tree, so that
block will have its lockdep key set to the tree reloc root, and create a
lockdep splat later on when we wander into that block from the fs root.

Unfortunately the only solution here is to make sure we do not set the
lockdep key to the reloc tree lockdep key normally, and then reset any
blocks we wander into from the reloc root when we're doing the merged.

This solves the problem of having mixed tree reloc keys intermixed with
normal tree keys, and then allows us to make sure in the merge case we
maintain the lock order of

normal tree -> reloc tree

We handle this by setting a bit on the reloc root when we do the search
for the block we want to relocate, and any block we search into or COW
at that point gets set to the reloc tree key. This works correctly
because we only ever COW down to the parent node, so we aren't resetting
the key for the block we're linking into the fs root.

With this patch we no longer have the lockdep splat in btrfs/187.

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: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then
btrfs_relocate_block_group() calls

relocate_block_group()
prepare_to_relocate()
set_reloc_control()

that assigns rc to the variable fs_info->reloc_ctl. When
prepare_to_relocate() returns, it calls

btrfs_commit_transaction()
btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups()
btrfs_alloc_path()
kmem_cache_zalloc()

which may fail for example (or other errors could happen). When the
failure occurs, btrfs_relocate_block_group() detects the error and frees
rc and doesn't set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL. After that, in
btrfs_init_reloc_root(), rc is retrieved from fs_info->reloc_ctl and
then used, which may cause a use-after-free bug.

This possible bug can be triggered by calling btrfs_ioctl_balance()
before calling btrfs_ioctl_defrag().

To fix this possible bug, in prepare_to_relocate(), check if
btrfs_commit_transaction() fails. If the failure occurs,
unset_reloc_control() is called to set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL.

The error log in our fault-injection testing is shown as follows:

[ 58.751070] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.753577] Call Trace:
...
[ 58.755800] kasan_report+0x45/0x60
[ 58.756066] btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
[ 58.757304] record_root_in_trans+0x792/0xa10 [btrfs]
[ 58.757748] btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x463/0x4f0 [btrfs]
[ 58.758231] start_transaction+0x896/0x2950 [btrfs]
[ 58.758661] btrfs_defrag_root+0x250/0xc00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759083] btrfs_ioctl_defrag+0x467/0xa00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759513] btrfs_ioctl+0x3c95/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.768510] Allocated by task 23683:
[ 58.768777] ____kasan_kmalloc+0xb5/0xf0
[ 58.769069] __kmalloc+0x227/0x3d0
[ 58.769325] alloc_reloc_control+0x10a/0x3d0 [btrfs]
[ 58.769755] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x7aa/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.770228] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.770655] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.771071] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.771472] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.771902] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.773337] Freed by task 23683:
...
[ 58.774815] kfree+0xda/0x2b0
[ 58.775038] free_reloc_control+0x1d6/0x220 [btrfs]
[ 58.775465] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x115c/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.775944] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.776369] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.776784] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.777185] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.777621] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...

Reported-by: TOTE Robot <oslab@tsinghua.edu.cn>
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+
Reviewed-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@dorminy.me>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Zixuan Fu <r33s3n6@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

show more ...

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARN

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

[ Upstream commit b40130b23ca4a08c5785d5a3559805916bddba3c ]

We have been hitting the following lockdep splat with btrfs/187 recently

WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.19.0-rc8+ #775 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
btrfs/752500 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff97e1875a97b8 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

but task is already holding lock:
ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_init_new_buffer+0x7d/0x2c0
btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x120/0x3b0
__btrfs_cow_block+0x136/0x600
btrfs_cow_block+0x10b/0x230
btrfs_search_slot+0x53b/0xb70
btrfs_lookup_inode+0x2a/0xa0
__btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x5f/0x280
btrfs_async_run_delayed_root+0x24c/0x290
btrfs_work_helper+0xf2/0x3e0
process_one_work+0x271/0x590
worker_thread+0x52/0x3b0
kthread+0xf0/0x120
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

-> #1 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{3:3}:
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_search_slot+0x3c3/0xb70
do_relocation+0x10c/0x6b0
relocate_tree_blocks+0x317/0x6d0
relocate_block_group+0x1f1/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

-> #0 (btrfs-treloc-02#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
btrfs-treloc-02#2 --> btrfs-tree-01 --> btrfs-tree-01/1

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-tree-01);
lock(btrfs-tree-01/1);
lock(btrfs-treloc-02#2);

*** DEADLOCK ***

7 locks held by btrfs/752500:
#0: ffff97e292fdf460 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: btrfs_ioctl+0x208/0x2c90
#1: ffff97e284c02050 (&fs_info->reclaim_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_balance+0x55f/0xe40
#2: ffff97e284c00878 (&fs_info->cleaner_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x236/0x400
#3: ffff97e292fdf650 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: merge_reloc_root+0xef/0x610
#4: ffff97e284c02378 (btrfs_trans_num_writers){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#5: ffff97e284c023a0 (btrfs_trans_num_extwriters){++++}-{0:0}, at: join_transaction+0x1a8/0x5a0
#6: ffff97e1875a9278 (btrfs-tree-01/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110

stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 752500 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8+ #775
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
Call Trace:

dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x73
check_noncircular+0xd6/0x100
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
__lock_acquire+0x1122/0x1e10
lock_acquire+0xc2/0x2d0
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
down_write_nested+0x41/0x80
? __btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
__btrfs_tree_lock+0x24/0x110
btrfs_lock_root_node+0x31/0x50
btrfs_search_slot+0x1cb/0xb70
? lock_release+0x137/0x2d0
? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x50
? release_extent_buffer+0x128/0x180
replace_path+0x541/0x9f0
merge_reloc_root+0x1d6/0x610
merge_reloc_roots+0xe2/0x260
relocate_block_group+0x2c8/0x560
btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x23e/0x400
btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x4c/0x140
btrfs_balance+0x755/0xe40
btrfs_ioctl+0x1ea2/0x2c90
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? lock_is_held_type+0xe2/0x140
? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

This isn't necessarily new, it's just tricky to hit in practice. There
are two competing things going on here. With relocation we create a
snapshot of every fs tree with a reloc tree. Any extent buffers that
get initialized here are initialized with the reloc root lockdep key.
However since it is a snapshot, any blocks that are currently in cache
that originally belonged to the fs tree will have the normal tree
lockdep key set. This creates the lock dependency of

reloc tree -> normal tree

for the extent buffer locking during the first phase of the relocation
as we walk down the reloc root to relocate blocks.

However this is problematic because the final phase of the relocation is
merging the reloc root into the original fs root. This involves
searching down to any keys that exist in the original fs root and then
swapping the relocated block and the original fs root block. We have to
search down to the fs root first, and then go search the reloc root for
the block we need to replace. This creates the dependency of

normal tree -> reloc tree

which is why lockdep complains.

Additionally even if we were to fix this particular mismatch with a
different nesting for the merge case, we're still slotting in a block
that has a owner of the reloc root objectid into a normal tree, so that
block will have its lockdep key set to the tree reloc root, and create a
lockdep splat later on when we wander into that block from the fs root.

Unfortunately the only solution here is to make sure we do not set the
lockdep key to the reloc tree lockdep key normally, and then reset any
blocks we wander into from the reloc root when we're doing the merged.

This solves the problem of having mixed tree reloc keys intermixed with
normal tree keys, and then allows us to make sure in the merge case we
maintain the lock order of

normal tree -> reloc tree

We handle this by setting a bit on the reloc root when we do the search
for the block we want to relocate, and any block we search into or COW
at that point gets set to the reloc tree key. This works correctly
because we only ever COW down to the parent node, so we aren't resetting
the key for the block we're linking into the fs root.

With this patch we no longer have the lockdep splat in btrfs/187.

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: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then

btrfs: unset reloc control if transaction commit fails in prepare_to_relocate()

commit 85f02d6c856b9f3a0acf5219de6e32f58b9778eb upstream.

In btrfs_relocate_block_group(), the rc is allocated. Then
btrfs_relocate_block_group() calls

relocate_block_group()
prepare_to_relocate()
set_reloc_control()

that assigns rc to the variable fs_info->reloc_ctl. When
prepare_to_relocate() returns, it calls

btrfs_commit_transaction()
btrfs_start_dirty_block_groups()
btrfs_alloc_path()
kmem_cache_zalloc()

which may fail for example (or other errors could happen). When the
failure occurs, btrfs_relocate_block_group() detects the error and frees
rc and doesn't set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL. After that, in
btrfs_init_reloc_root(), rc is retrieved from fs_info->reloc_ctl and
then used, which may cause a use-after-free bug.

This possible bug can be triggered by calling btrfs_ioctl_balance()
before calling btrfs_ioctl_defrag().

To fix this possible bug, in prepare_to_relocate(), check if
btrfs_commit_transaction() fails. If the failure occurs,
unset_reloc_control() is called to set fs_info->reloc_ctl to NULL.

The error log in our fault-injection testing is shown as follows:

[ 58.751070] BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.753577] Call Trace:
...
[ 58.755800] kasan_report+0x45/0x60
[ 58.756066] btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x7ca/0x920 [btrfs]
[ 58.757304] record_root_in_trans+0x792/0xa10 [btrfs]
[ 58.757748] btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x463/0x4f0 [btrfs]
[ 58.758231] start_transaction+0x896/0x2950 [btrfs]
[ 58.758661] btrfs_defrag_root+0x250/0xc00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759083] btrfs_ioctl_defrag+0x467/0xa00 [btrfs]
[ 58.759513] btrfs_ioctl+0x3c95/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.768510] Allocated by task 23683:
[ 58.768777] ____kasan_kmalloc+0xb5/0xf0
[ 58.769069] __kmalloc+0x227/0x3d0
[ 58.769325] alloc_reloc_control+0x10a/0x3d0 [btrfs]
[ 58.769755] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x7aa/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.770228] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.770655] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.771071] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.771472] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.771902] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...
[ 58.773337] Freed by task 23683:
...
[ 58.774815] kfree+0xda/0x2b0
[ 58.775038] free_reloc_control+0x1d6/0x220 [btrfs]
[ 58.775465] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x115c/0x1e20 [btrfs]
[ 58.775944] btrfs_relocate_chunk+0xf1/0x760 [btrfs]
[ 58.776369] __btrfs_balance+0x1326/0x1f10 [btrfs]
[ 58.776784] btrfs_balance+0x3150/0x3d30 [btrfs]
[ 58.777185] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0xd84/0x1410 [btrfs]
[ 58.777621] btrfs_ioctl+0x4caa/0x114e0 [btrfs]
...

Reported-by: TOTE Robot <oslab@tsinghua.edu.cn>
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+
Reviewed-by: Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@dorminy.me>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Zixuan Fu <r33s3n6@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

show more ...