On 01/08/2020 00:33, Jens Axboe wrote:

On 7/31/20 1:43 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:

quoted

On 30/07/2020 14:33, Damien Le Moal wrote:

quoted

On 2020/07/30 20:25, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:

quoted

When we loose a device for whatever reason while (re)scanning zones, we
trip over a NULL pointer in blk_revalidate_zone_cb, like in the following
log:

sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 3418095616 4096-byte logical blocks: (14.0 TB/12.7 TiB)
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 52156 zones of 65536 logical blocks
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 37 00 00 08
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] REPORT ZONES start lba 1065287680 failed
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] REPORT ZONES: Result: hostbyte=0x00 driverbyte=0x08
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Sense Key : 0xb [current]
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] ASC=0x0 ASCQ=0x6
sda: failed to revalidate zones
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 0 4096-byte logical blocks: (0 B/0 B)
sda: detected capacity change from 14000519643136 to 0
==================================================================
BUG: KASAN: null-ptr-deref in blk_revalidate_zone_cb+0x1b7/0x550
Write of size 8 at addr 0000000000000010 by task kworker/u4:1/58

CPU: 1 PID: 58 Comm: kworker/u4:1 Not tainted 5.8.0-rc1 #692
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.13.0-0-gf21b5a4-rebuilt.opensuse.org 04/01/2014
Workqueue: events_unbound async_run_entry_fn
Call Trace:
 dump_stack+0x7d/0xb0
 ? blk_revalidate_zone_cb+0x1b7/0x550
 kasan_report.cold+0x5/0x37
 ? blk_revalidate_zone_cb+0x1b7/0x550
 check_memory_region+0x145/0x1a0
 blk_revalidate_zone_cb+0x1b7/0x550
 sd_zbc_parse_report+0x1f1/0x370
 ? blk_req_zone_write_trylock+0x200/0x200
 ? sectors_to_logical+0x60/0x60
 ? blk_req_zone_write_trylock+0x200/0x200
 ? blk_req_zone_write_trylock+0x200/0x200
 sd_zbc_report_zones+0x3c4/0x5e0
 ? sd_dif_config_host+0x500/0x500
 blk_revalidate_disk_zones+0x231/0x44d
 ? _raw_write_lock_irqsave+0xb0/0xb0
 ? blk_queue_free_zone_bitmaps+0xd0/0xd0
 sd_zbc_read_zones+0x8cf/0x11a0
 sd_revalidate_disk+0x305c/0x64e0
 ? __device_add_disk+0x776/0xf20
 ? read_capacity_16.part.0+0x1080/0x1080
 ? blk_alloc_devt+0x250/0x250
 ? create_object.isra.0+0x595/0xa20
 ? kasan_unpoison_shadow+0x33/0x40
 sd_probe+0x8dc/0xcd2
 really_probe+0x20e/0xaf0
 __driver_attach_async_helper+0x249/0x2d0
 async_run_entry_fn+0xbe/0x560
 process_one_work+0x764/0x1290
 ? _raw_read_unlock_irqrestore+0x30/0x30
 worker_thread+0x598/0x12f0
 ? __kthread_parkme+0xc6/0x1b0
 ? schedule+0xed/0x2c0
 ? process_one_work+0x1290/0x1290
 kthread+0x36b/0x440
 ? kthread_create_worker_on_cpu+0xa0/0xa0
 ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
==================================================================

When the device is already gone we end up with the following scenario:
The device's capacity is 0 and thus the number of zones will be 0 as well. When
allocating the bitmap for the conventional zones, we then trip over a NULL
pointer.

So if we encounter a zoned block device with a 0 capacity, don't dare to
revalidate the zones sizes.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <redacted>
---

Note: This is a hot-fix for 5.8, we're working on something to make a
recoverable error recoverable.


 block/blk-zoned.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/block/blk-zoned.c b/block/blk-zoned.c
index 23831fa8701d..480dfff69a00 100644
--- a/block/blk-zoned.c
+++ b/block/blk-zoned.c

@@ -497,6 +497,9 @@ int blk_revalidate_disk_zones(struct gendisk *disk,
 	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!queue_is_mq(q)))
 		return -EIO;
 
+	if (!get_capacity(disk))
+		return -EIO;
+
 	/*
 	 * Ensure that all memory allocations in this context are done as if
 	 * GFP_NOIO was specified.

I reworked sd_zbc_read_zones() and sd_zbc_revalidate_zones() to allow recovering
from simple temporary errors and avoid this problem. Will send the patch
tomorrow or so after some more testing.

But even with that patch applied, I think this patch makes the generic block
code more solid. So:

Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal <redacted>

Jens any chance we can still get this into 5.8?

I'm not going to push this out now, if 5.8 is being cut on Sunday. If we
happen to get an -rc8, then it's not impossible.

But this isn't a regression in this merge window as far as I can tell,
so really shouldn't be critical to get in. Marking it for stable etc and
queueing for 5.9 may be the saner approach, imho.

You're right. When I wrote this I was still under the impression it's a 
regression I did introduce with the zone append series.

Anyway, thanks for pulling in.