The backport of upstream patch 5dccdc5a1916 ("ext4: do not iput inode under running transaction in ext4_rename()") introduced a regression on the stable kernels 4.14 and older. One of the end_rename error label was forgetting to change to release_bh, which may trigger below bug.
------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at /home/zhangyi/hulk-4.4/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c:30! ... Call Trace: [<ffffffff8b4207b2>] ext4_rename+0x9e2/0x10c0 [<ffffffff8b331324>] ? unlazy_walk+0x124/0x2a0 [<ffffffff8b420eb5>] ext4_rename2+0x25/0x60 [<ffffffff8b335104>] vfs_rename+0x3a4/0xed0 [<ffffffff8b33a7ad>] SYSC_renameat2+0x57d/0x7f0 [<ffffffff8b33c119>] SyS_renameat+0x19/0x30 [<ffffffff8bc57bb8>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0x78 ... ---[ end trace 75346ce7c76b9f06 ]---
Fixes: 2fc8ce56985d ("ext4: do not iput inode under running transaction in ext4_rename()") Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi yi.zhang@huawei.com --- fs/ext4/namei.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c index f22fcb393684..8cd2a7e1eef1 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/namei.c +++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c @@ -3561,7 +3561,7 @@ static int ext4_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, !ext4_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent(new.dir, old.inode)) { retval = -EXDEV; - goto end_rename; + goto release_bh; }
new.bh = ext4_find_entry(new.dir, &new.dentry->d_name,
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 08:35:07PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
The backport of upstream patch 5dccdc5a1916 ("ext4: do not iput inode under running transaction in ext4_rename()") introduced a regression on the stable kernels 4.14 and older. One of the end_rename error label was forgetting to change to release_bh, which may trigger below bug.
------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at /home/zhangyi/hulk-4.4/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c:30! ... Call Trace: [<ffffffff8b4207b2>] ext4_rename+0x9e2/0x10c0 [<ffffffff8b331324>] ? unlazy_walk+0x124/0x2a0 [<ffffffff8b420eb5>] ext4_rename2+0x25/0x60 [<ffffffff8b335104>] vfs_rename+0x3a4/0xed0 [<ffffffff8b33a7ad>] SYSC_renameat2+0x57d/0x7f0 [<ffffffff8b33c119>] SyS_renameat+0x19/0x30 [<ffffffff8bc57bb8>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0x78 ... ---[ end trace 75346ce7c76b9f06 ]---
Fixes: 2fc8ce56985d ("ext4: do not iput inode under running transaction in ext4_rename()") Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi yi.zhang@huawei.com
fs/ext4/namei.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c index f22fcb393684..8cd2a7e1eef1 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/namei.c +++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c @@ -3561,7 +3561,7 @@ static int ext4_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, !ext4_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent(new.dir, old.inode)) { retval = -EXDEV;
goto end_rename;
goto release_bh;new.bh = ext4_find_entry(new.dir, &new.dentry->d_name, -- 2.25.4
So should this also go to 4.14.y and 4.9.y?
thanks,
greg k-h
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 02:34:57PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 08:35:07PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
The backport of upstream patch 5dccdc5a1916 ("ext4: do not iput inode under running transaction in ext4_rename()") introduced a regression on the stable kernels 4.14 and older. One of the end_rename error label was forgetting to change to release_bh, which may trigger below bug.
------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at /home/zhangyi/hulk-4.4/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c:30! ... Call Trace: [<ffffffff8b4207b2>] ext4_rename+0x9e2/0x10c0 [<ffffffff8b331324>] ? unlazy_walk+0x124/0x2a0 [<ffffffff8b420eb5>] ext4_rename2+0x25/0x60 [<ffffffff8b335104>] vfs_rename+0x3a4/0xed0 [<ffffffff8b33a7ad>] SYSC_renameat2+0x57d/0x7f0 [<ffffffff8b33c119>] SyS_renameat+0x19/0x30 [<ffffffff8bc57bb8>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0x78 ... ---[ end trace 75346ce7c76b9f06 ]---
Fixes: 2fc8ce56985d ("ext4: do not iput inode under running transaction in ext4_rename()") Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi yi.zhang@huawei.com
fs/ext4/namei.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c index f22fcb393684..8cd2a7e1eef1 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/namei.c +++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c @@ -3561,7 +3561,7 @@ static int ext4_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, !ext4_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent(new.dir, old.inode)) { retval = -EXDEV;
goto end_rename;
goto release_bh;new.bh = ext4_find_entry(new.dir, &new.dentry->d_name, -- 2.25.4
So should this also go to 4.14.y and 4.9.y?
Ah, you already did that, sorry for the noise.
And thanks for the patches, will go queue them up now, much appreciated.
greg k-h
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Greg KH -
Zhang Yi