The patch below does not apply to the 5.15-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-5.15.y git checkout FETCH_HEAD git cherry-pick -x 7b26da407420e5054e3f06c5d13271697add9423 # <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.> git commit -s git send-email --to 'stable@vger.kernel.org' --in-reply-to '2025101534-attempt-stubbly-cf5f@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 5.15.y' HEAD^..
Possible dependencies:
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 7b26da407420e5054e3f06c5d13271697add9423 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Qu Wenruo wqu@suse.com Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 14:33:23 +0930 Subject: [PATCH] btrfs: fix the incorrect max_bytes value for find_lock_delalloc_range()
[BUG] With my local branch to enable bs > ps support for btrfs, sometimes I hit the following ASSERT() inside submit_one_sector():
ASSERT(block_start != EXTENT_MAP_HOLE);
Please note that it's not yet possible to hit this ASSERT() in the wild yet, as it requires btrfs bs > ps support, which is not even in the development branch.
But on the other hand, there is also a very low chance to hit above ASSERT() with bs < ps cases, so this is an existing bug affect not only the incoming bs > ps support but also the existing bs < ps support.
[CAUSE] Firstly that ASSERT() means we're trying to submit a dirty block but without a real extent map nor ordered extent map backing it.
Furthermore with extra debugging, the folio triggering such ASSERT() is always larger than the fs block size in my bs > ps case. (8K block size, 4K page size)
After some more debugging, the ASSERT() is trigger by the following sequence:
extent_writepage() | We got a 32K folio (4 fs blocks) at file offset 0, and the fs block | size is 8K, page size is 4K. | And there is another 8K folio at file offset 32K, which is also | dirty. | So the filemap layout looks like the following: | | "||" is the filio boundary in the filemap. | "//| is the dirty range. | | 0 8K 16K 24K 32K 40K | |////////| |//////////////////////||////////| | |- writepage_delalloc() | |- find_lock_delalloc_range() for [0, 8K) | | Now range [0, 8K) is properly locked. | | | |- find_lock_delalloc_range() for [16K, 40K) | | |- btrfs_find_delalloc_range() returned range [16K, 40K) | | |- lock_delalloc_folios() locked folio 0 successfully | | | | | | The filemap range [32K, 40K) got dropped from filemap. | | | | | |- lock_delalloc_folios() failed with -EAGAIN on folio 32K | | | As the folio at 32K is dropped. | | | | | |- loops = 1; | | |- max_bytes = PAGE_SIZE; | | |- goto again; | | | This will re-do the lookup for dirty delalloc ranges. | | | | | |- btrfs_find_delalloc_range() called with @max_bytes == 4K | | | This is smaller than block size, so | | | btrfs_find_delalloc_range() is unable to return any range. | | - return false; | | | - Now only range [0, 8K) has an OE for it, but for dirty range | [16K, 32K) it's dirty without an OE. | This breaks the assumption that writepage_delalloc() will find | and lock all dirty ranges inside the folio. | |- extent_writepage_io() |- submit_one_sector() for [0, 8K) | Succeeded | |- submit_one_sector() for [16K, 24K) Triggering the ASSERT(), as there is no OE, and the original extent map is a hole.
Please note that, this also exposed the same problem for bs < ps support. E.g. with 64K page size and 4K block size.
If we failed to lock a folio, and falls back into the "loops = 1;" branch, we will re-do the search using 64K as max_bytes. Which may fail again to lock the next folio, and exit early without handling all dirty blocks inside the folio.
[FIX] Instead of using the fixed size PAGE_SIZE as @max_bytes, use @sectorsize, so that we are ensured to find and lock any remaining blocks inside the folio.
And since we're here, add an extra ASSERT() to before calling btrfs_find_delalloc_range() to make sure the @max_bytes is at least no smaller than a block to avoid false negative.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.15+ Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo wqu@suse.com Signed-off-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c index 0782533aad51..2b6027ebf265 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c @@ -393,6 +393,13 @@ noinline_for_stack bool find_lock_delalloc_range(struct inode *inode, /* step one, find a bunch of delalloc bytes starting at start */ delalloc_start = *start; delalloc_end = 0; + + /* + * If @max_bytes is smaller than a block, btrfs_find_delalloc_range() can + * return early without handling any dirty ranges. + */ + ASSERT(max_bytes >= fs_info->sectorsize); + found = btrfs_find_delalloc_range(tree, &delalloc_start, &delalloc_end, max_bytes, &cached_state); if (!found || delalloc_end <= *start || delalloc_start > orig_end) { @@ -423,13 +430,14 @@ noinline_for_stack bool find_lock_delalloc_range(struct inode *inode, delalloc_end); ASSERT(!ret || ret == -EAGAIN); if (ret == -EAGAIN) { - /* some of the folios are gone, lets avoid looping by - * shortening the size of the delalloc range we're searching + /* + * Some of the folios are gone, lets avoid looping by + * shortening the size of the delalloc range we're searching. */ btrfs_free_extent_state(cached_state); cached_state = NULL; if (!loops) { - max_bytes = PAGE_SIZE; + max_bytes = fs_info->sectorsize; loops = 1; goto again; } else {