From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377C3C07E9C for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:33:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1AC613C8 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:33:40 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DB1AC613C8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 6DCAC6B0036; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:33:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 6B3A36B005D; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:33:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 57BA46B006C; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:33:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0041.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.41]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC9D6B0036 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:33:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin24.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A63318024DCD for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:33:39 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78328324158.24.E5194B6 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31277E001991 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:33:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5033961279; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:33:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1625484818; bh=JCzbfrOBLEoTbgD6Ln3Es2DOUH5lhf543Bz5pCxk8ng=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=jLGcleRG3bHdycKc+f5w7I/cPQkXKECKrOn7KDf8dDQ1lXJuG9XxiGqEHg8XBuMXg XvjlTmPRS0d5XLk0/f2+kJMvK/ouPg7pqdfEmi5UNknyoTYX+lvHt/99vhRR2BaYfw 1GlmthWgxTVg62ebKiNrGiWh1MyO2sgMlZK50A8SbJEZPCVwPpFBWULOL+pVBd1QkE oKpGaCeL5OslaTC/rG3tRjGeCkMUyW8bExim71Pn6AXzahNuxesqY2CuwYx17Dqgwa Mpa4ryg3MYK6wABc99I2wu2ZYiL8oSjds8azi7O/pKnIdpyH+rY+XnTUEvkCgrEAY9 Prsqfvqf4PRIg== Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: initialize page->private when using for our internal use To: Jaegeuk Kim Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mm@kvack.org, Matthew Wilcox References: <20210705052216.831989-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 19:33:35 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: imf30.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=jLGcleRG; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass (imf30.hostedemail.com: domain of chao@kernel.org designates 198.145.29.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=chao@kernel.org X-Stat-Signature: 5yp1csajfpnybib9ykrg14bmz1w6kec8 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 31277E001991 X-HE-Tag: 1625484819-891969 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 2021/7/5 16:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt entire flag >>> operations. >> >> Oops, I didn't get the point, shouldn't .private be zero after page was >> just allocated by filesystem? What's the case we will encounter stall >> private data left in page? > > I'm seeing f2fs_migrate_page() has the newpage with some value without Private > flag. That causes a kernel panic later due to wrong private flag used in f2fs. I'm not familiar with that part of codes, so Cc mm mailing list for help. My question is newpage in .migrate_page() may contain non-zero value in .private field but w/o setting PagePrivate flag, is it a normal case? Thanks, > >> >> Cc Matthew Wilcox. >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>> Fixes: b763f3bedc2d ("f2fs: restructure f2fs page.private layout") >>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim >>> --- >>> fs/f2fs/data.c | 2 ++ >>> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 5 ++++- >>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c >>> index 3a01a1b50104..d2cf48c5a2e4 100644 >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c >>> @@ -3819,6 +3819,8 @@ int f2fs_migrate_page(struct address_space *mapping, >>> get_page(newpage); >>> } >>> + /* guarantee to start from no stale private field */ >>> + set_page_private(newpage, 0); >>> if (PagePrivate(page)) { >>> set_page_private(newpage, page_private(page)); >>> SetPagePrivate(newpage); >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>> index 65befc68d88e..ee8eb33e2c25 100644 >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h >>> @@ -1331,7 +1331,8 @@ enum { >>> #define PAGE_PRIVATE_GET_FUNC(name, flagname) \ >>> static inline bool page_private_##name(struct page *page) \ >>> { \ >>> - return test_bit(PAGE_PRIVATE_NOT_POINTER, &page_private(page)) && \ >>> + return PagePrivate(page) && \ >>> + test_bit(PAGE_PRIVATE_NOT_POINTER, &page_private(page)) && \ >>> test_bit(PAGE_PRIVATE_##flagname, &page_private(page)); \ >>> } >>> @@ -1341,6 +1342,7 @@ static inline void set_page_private_##name(struct page *page) \ >>> if (!PagePrivate(page)) { \ >>> get_page(page); \ >>> SetPagePrivate(page); \ >>> + set_page_private(page, 0); \ >>> } \ >>> set_bit(PAGE_PRIVATE_NOT_POINTER, &page_private(page)); \ >>> set_bit(PAGE_PRIVATE_##flagname, &page_private(page)); \ >>> @@ -1392,6 +1394,7 @@ static inline void set_page_private_data(struct page *page, unsigned long data) >>> if (!PagePrivate(page)) { >>> get_page(page); >>> SetPagePrivate(page); >>> + set_page_private(page, 0); >>> } >>> set_bit(PAGE_PRIVATE_NOT_POINTER, &page_private(page)); >>> page_private(page) |= data << PAGE_PRIVATE_MAX; >>>