Re: INFO: task hung in xlog_grant_head_check

[Darrick J. Wong]

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:52:08PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:26:20AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 08:31:08AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 10:55:02AM -0700, syzbot wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > syzbot found the following crash on:
> > > > 
> > > > HEAD commit:    203ec2fed17a Merge tag 'armsoc-fixes' of git://git.kernel...
> > > > git tree:       upstream
> > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=11c1ad77800000
> > > > kernel config:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=f3b4e30da84ec1ed
> > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=568245b88fbaedcb1959
> > > > compiler:       gcc (GCC) 8.0.1 20180413 (experimental)
> > > > syzkaller repro:https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=122c7427800000
> > > > C reproducer:   https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=10387057800000
> > > > 
> > > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > > Reported-by: syzbot+568245b88fbaedcb1959@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > 
> > > >         (ptrval): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > > > ................
> > > >         (ptrval): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > > > ................
> > > > XFS (loop0): metadata I/O error in "xfs_trans_read_buf_map" at daddr 0x2 len
> > > > 1 error 117
> > > > XFS (loop0): xfs_imap_lookup: xfs_ialloc_read_agi() returned error -117,
> > > > agno 0
> > > > XFS (loop0): failed to read root inode
> > > 
> > > FWIW, the initial console output is actually:
> > > 
> > > [  448.028253] XFS (loop0): Mounting V4 Filesystem
> > > [  448.033540] XFS (loop0): Log size 9371840 blocks too large, maximum size is 1048576 blocks
> > > [  448.042287] XFS (loop0): Log size out of supported range.
> > > [  448.047841] XFS (loop0): Continuing onwards, but if log hangs are experienced then please report this message in the bug report.
> > > [  448.060712] XFS (loop0): totally zeroed log
> > > 
> > > ... which warns about an oversized log and resulting log hangs. Not
> > > having dug into the details of why this occurs so quickly in this mount
> > > failure path,
> > 
> > I suspect that it is a head and/or log tail pointer overflow, so when it
> > tries to do the first trans reserve of the mount - to write the
> > unmount record - it says "no log space available, please wait".
> > 
> > > it does look like we'd never have got past this point on a
> > > v5 fs (i.e., the above warning would become an error and we'd not enter
> > > the xfs_log_mount_cancel() path).
> > 
> > And this comes back to my repeated comments about fuzzers needing
> > to fuzz properly made V5 filesystems as we catch and error out on
> > things like this. Fuzzing random collections of v4 filesystem
> > fragments will continue to trip over problems we've avoided with v5
> > filesystems, and this is further evidence to point to that.
> >
> > 
> > I'd suggest that at this point, syzbot XFS reports should be
> > redirected to /dev/null. It's not worth our time to triage
> > unreviewed bot generated bug reports until the syzbot developers
> > start listening and acting on what we have been telling them
> > about fuzzing filesystems and reproducing bugs that are meaningful
> > and useful to us.
> 
> The whole point of fuzzing is to provide improper inputs.  A kernel
> bug is a kernel bug, even if it's in deprecated/unmaintained code, or
> involves userspace doing something unexpected.  If you have known
> buggy code in XFS that you refuse to fix,

Ok, that's it.

I disagree with Google's syzbot strategy, and I dissent most vehemently!

The whole point of constructing free software in public is that we
people communally build things that anyone can use for any purpose and
that anyone can modify.  That privilege comes with a societal
expectation that the people using this commons will contribute to the
upkeep of that commons or it rots.  For end users that means helping us
to find the gaps, but for software developers at large multinational
companies that means (to a first approximation) pitching in to write the
code, write the documentation, and to fix the problems.

Yes, there are many places where fs metadata validation is insufficient
to avoid misbehavior.  Google's strategy of dumping vulnerability
disclosures on public mailing lists every week, demanding that other
people regularly reallocate their time to fix these problems, and not
helping to fix anything breaks our free software societal norms.  Again,
the whole point of free software is to share the responsibility, share
the work, and share the gains.  That is how collaboration works.

Help us to improve the software so that we all will be better off.

Figure out how to strengthen the validation, figure out how to balance
the risk of exposure against the risk of nonfunctionality, and figure
out how to discuss with this community.  That is how the game works.

Google has enough money and smart people that you have (collectively)
learned how to spoof humans, so you can well afford to spend a small
fraction of that hiring some developers and writers and putting them to
work with us.

If you refuse to do this, you already /have/ a config option to turn off
the 'known buggy/unmaintained code in [your] kernel'; use it.  I will
not repeat this message again[1].

--D

[1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=152303106427867&w=2

> then please provide a kernel config option so that users can disable
> the unmaintained XFS formats/features, leaving the maintained ones.
> As-is, you seem to be forcing everyone who enables CONFIG_XFS_FS to
> build known buggy/unmaintained code into their kernel.
> 
> - Eric
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html