On 8/20/18 10:06 AM, Brian Foster wrote:

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:43:46AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:39:53PM -0700, Eric Sandeen wrote:

quoted

On 6/4/18 11:24 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:

quoted

From: Dave Chinner <redacted>

There are rules for vald extent size hints. We enforce them when
applications set them, but fuzzers violate those rules and that
screws us over.

This results in alignment assertion failures when setting up
allocations such as this in direct IO:

XFS: Assertion failed: ap->length, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c, line: 3432
....
Call Trace:
 xfs_bmap_btalloc+0x415/0x910
 xfs_bmapi_write+0x71c/0x12e0
 xfs_iomap_write_direct+0x2a9/0x420
 xfs_file_iomap_begin+0x4dc/0xa70
 iomap_apply+0x43/0x100
 iomap_file_buffered_write+0x62/0x90
 xfs_file_buffered_aio_write+0xba/0x300
 __vfs_write+0xd5/0x150
 vfs_write+0xb6/0x180
 ksys_write+0x45/0xa0
 do_syscall_64+0x5a/0x180
 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe

And from xfs_db:

core.extsize = 10380288

Which is not an integer multiple of the block size, and so violates
Rule #7 for setting extent size hints. Validate extent size hint
rules in the inode verifier to catch this.

So, I think that if I do:

# mkfs.xfs -f -m crc=0 $TEST_DEV
# ./check xfs/229
# ./check xfs/229

I trip the verifier, because I end up with freed inodes on disk with an
extent size hints but zeroed flags.  

xfs_ifree sets di_flags = 0 but doesn't clear di_extsize; xfs_inode_validate_extsize
says if extsize !=0 and the hint flag is set, it fails

Anyone else see this?

Yeah, I think I just hit this on the TEST_DEV in xfs/242.

git blame says I lifted the code from the scrub code, and I probably
wrote the code having read the ioctl code (which clears the extsize
field if the iflag isn't set).

quoted

(crc=0 needed because that causes us to actually reread the inode chunks
in xfs_iread vs. /* shortcut IO on inode allocation if possible */

Hmmm, so a v5 fs mounted with ikeep will also read an inode chunk when
creating an inode.  It looks like we do that (instead of zeroing the
incore inode and setting a random i_generation) to preserve the existing
generation number?

In any case, it's pretty clear that kernels have been writing out freed
inode cores with di_mode == 0, di_flags == 0, and di_extsize == (some
number) so we clearly can't have that in the verifier.  It looks like we
only examine di_extsize if either EXTSZ flag are set, so it's not
causing incorrect behavior.  Maybe it can be a preening fix in
scrub/repair.

I just stumbled on this problem with xfs/229 that Eric reported. I'm
confused by the comment above regarding this not causing incorrect
behavior.

I think Darrick meant that having a nonzero extent size hint on disk
won't cause incorrect behavior because "we only examine di_extsize if
either EXTSZ flag are set"

-Eric