user/sven/linux.git/fs, branch v5.19.8

cifs: fix small mempool leak in SMB2_negotiate()

2022-09-08T09:24:02Z

commit 27893dfc1285f80f80f46b3b8c95f5d15d2e66d0 upstream. In some cases of failure (dialect mismatches) in SMB2_negotiate(), after the request is sent, the checks would return -EIO when they should be rather setting rc = -EIO and jumping to neg_exit to free the response buffer from mempool. Signed-off-by: Enzo Matsumiya Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Reviewed-by: Ronnie Sahlberg Signed-off-by: Steve French Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

cachefiles: make on-demand request distribution fairer

2022-09-08T09:24:00Z

[ Upstream commit 1122f40072731525c06b1371cfa30112b9b54d27 ] For now, enqueuing and dequeuing on-demand requests all start from idx 0, this makes request distribution unfair. In the weighty concurrent I/O scenario, the request stored in higher idx will starve. Searching requests cyclically in cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read, makes distribution fairer. Fixes: c8383054506c ("cachefiles: notify the user daemon when looking up cookie") Reported-by: Yongqing Li Signed-off-by: Xin Yin Signed-off-by: David Howells Reviewed-by: Jeffle Xu Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220817065200.11543-1-yinxin.x@bytedance.com/ # v1 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220825020945.2293-1-yinxin.x@bytedance.com/ # v2 Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

cachefiles: fix error return code in cachefiles_ondemand_copen()

2022-09-08T09:24:00Z

[ Upstream commit c93ccd63b18c8d108c57b2bb0e5f3b058b9d2029 ] The cache_size field of copen is specified by the user daemon. If cache_size < 0, then the OPEN request is expected to fail, while copen itself shall succeed. However, returning 0 is indeed unexpected when cache_size is an invalid error code. Fix this by returning error when cache_size is an invalid error code. Changes ======= v4: update the code suggested by Dan v3: update the commit log suggested by Jingbo. Fixes: c8383054506c ("cachefiles: notify the user daemon when looking up cookie") Signed-off-by: Sun Ke Suggested-by: Jeffle Xu Suggested-by: Dan Carpenter Signed-off-by: David Howells Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang Reviewed-by: Jingbo Xu Reviewed-by: Dan Carpenter Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220818111935.1683062-1-sunke32@huawei.com/ # v2 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220818125038.2247720-1-sunke32@huawei.com/ # v3 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220826023515.3437469-1-sunke32@huawei.com/ # v4 Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: tree-checker: check for overlapping extent items

2022-09-05T08:31:35Z

[ Upstream commit 899b7f69f244e539ea5df1b4d756046337de44a5 ] We're seeing a weird problem in production where we have overlapping extent items in the extent tree. It's unclear where these are coming from, and in debugging we realized there's no check in the tree checker for this sort of problem. Add a check to the tree-checker to make sure that the extents do not overlap each other. Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: fix lockdep splat with reloc root extent buffers

2022-09-05T08:31:35Z

[ 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 Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

btrfs: move lockdep class helpers to locking.c

2022-09-05T08:31:35Z

[ Upstream commit 0a27a0474d146eb79e09ec88bf0d4229f4cfc1b8 ] These definitions exist in disk-io.c, which is not related to the locking. Move this over to locking.h/c where it makes more sense. Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

ksmbd: don't remove dos attribute xattr on O_TRUNC open

2022-09-05T08:31:33Z

[ Upstream commit 17661ecf6a64eb11ae7f1108fe88686388b2acd5 ] When smb client open file in ksmbd share with O_TRUNC, dos attribute xattr is removed as well as data in file. This cause the FSCTL_SET_SPARSE request from the client fails because ksmbd can't update the dos attribute after setting ATTR_SPARSE_FILE. And this patch fix xfstests generic/469 test also. Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon Reviewed-by: Hyunchul Lee Signed-off-by: Steve French Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

ksmbd: return STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME error status if share is not configured

2022-09-05T08:31:32Z

[ Upstream commit fe54833dc8d97ef387e86f7c80537d51c503ca75 ] If share is not configured in smb.conf, smb2 tree connect should return STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME instead of STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_PATH. Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon Reviewed-by: Hyunchul Lee Signed-off-by: Steve French Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

fs/ntfs3: Fix work with fragmented xattr

2022-09-05T08:31:30Z

[ Upstream commit 42f86b1226a42bfc79a7125af435432ad4680a32 ] In some cases xattr is too fragmented, so we need to load it before writing. Signed-off-by: Konstantin Komarov Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

ocfs2: fix freeing uninitialized resource on ocfs2_dlm_shutdown

2022-08-31T15:18:16Z

commit 550842cc60987b269e31b222283ade3e1b6c7fc8 upstream. After commit 0737e01de9c4 ("ocfs2: ocfs2_mount_volume does cleanup job before return error"), any procedure after ocfs2_dlm_init() fails will trigger crash when calling ocfs2_dlm_shutdown(). ie: On local mount mode, no dlm resource is initialized. If ocfs2_mount_volume() fails in ocfs2_find_slot(), error handling will call ocfs2_dlm_shutdown(), then does dlm resource cleanup job, which will trigger kernel crash. This solution should bypass uninitialized resources in ocfs2_dlm_shutdown(). Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220815085754.20417-1-heming.zhao@suse.com Fixes: 0737e01de9c4 ("ocfs2: ocfs2_mount_volume does cleanup job before return error") Signed-off-by: Heming Zhao Reviewed-by: Joseph Qi Cc: Mark Fasheh Cc: Joel Becker Cc: Junxiao Bi Cc: Changwei Ge Cc: Gang He Cc: Jun Piao Cc: Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman