6.17-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Qu Wenruo wqu@suse.com
[ Upstream commit 67378b754608a3524d125bfa5744508a49fe48be ]
[BUG DURING BS > PS TEST] When running the following script on a btrfs whose block size is larger than page size, e.g. 8K block size and 4K page size, it will trigger a kernel BUG:
# mkfs.btrfs -s 8k $dev # mount $dev $mnt # mkdir $mnt/dir # ln -s dir $mnt/link # ls $mnt/link
The call trace looks like this:
BTRFS warning (device dm-2): support for block size 8192 with page size 4096 is experimental, some features may be missing BTRFS info (device dm-2): checking UUID tree BTRFS info (device dm-2): enabling ssd optimizations BTRFS info (device dm-2): enabling free space tree ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at /home/adam/linux/include/linux/highmem.h:275! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP CPU: 8 UID: 0 PID: 667 Comm: ls Tainted: G OE 6.17.0-rc4-custom+ #283 PREEMPT(full) Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS unknown 02/02/2022 RIP: 0010:zero_user_segments.constprop.0+0xdc/0xe0 [btrfs] Call Trace: <TASK> btrfs_get_extent.cold+0x85/0x101 [btrfs 7453c70c03e631c8d8bfdd4264fa62d3e238da6f] btrfs_do_readpage+0x244/0x750 [btrfs 7453c70c03e631c8d8bfdd4264fa62d3e238da6f] btrfs_read_folio+0x9c/0x100 [btrfs 7453c70c03e631c8d8bfdd4264fa62d3e238da6f] filemap_read_folio+0x37/0xe0 do_read_cache_folio+0x94/0x3e0 __page_get_link.isra.0+0x20/0x90 page_get_link+0x16/0x40 step_into+0x69b/0x830 path_lookupat+0xa7/0x170 filename_lookup+0xf7/0x200 ? set_ptes.isra.0+0x36/0x70 vfs_statx+0x7a/0x160 do_statx+0x63/0xa0 __x64_sys_statx+0x90/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x82/0xae0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 </TASK>
Please note bs > ps support is still under development and the enablement patch is not even in btrfs development branch.
[CAUSE] Btrfs reuses its data folio read path to handle symbolic links, as the symbolic link target is stored as an inline data extent.
But for newly created inodes, btrfs only set the minimal order if the target inode is a regular file.
Thus for above newly created symbolic link, it doesn't properly respect the minimal folio order, and triggered the above crash.
[FIX] Call btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() unconditionally inside btrfs_create_new_inode().
For symbolic links this will fix the crash as now the folio will meet the minimal order.
For regular files this brings no change.
For directory/bdev/char and all the other types of inodes, they won't go through the data read path, thus no effect either.
Fixes: cc38d178ff33 ("btrfs: enable large data folio support under CONFIG_BTRFS_EXPERIMENTAL") Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo wqu@suse.com Signed-off-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c index 18db1053cdf08..cd8a09e3d1dc0 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c @@ -6479,6 +6479,7 @@ int btrfs_create_new_inode(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, if (!args->subvol) btrfs_inherit_iflags(BTRFS_I(inode), BTRFS_I(dir));
+ btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order(BTRFS_I(inode)); if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode)) { if (btrfs_test_opt(fs_info, NODATASUM)) BTRFS_I(inode)->flags |= BTRFS_INODE_NODATASUM; @@ -6486,7 +6487,6 @@ int btrfs_create_new_inode(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, BTRFS_I(inode)->flags |= BTRFS_INODE_NODATACOW | BTRFS_INODE_NODATASUM; btrfs_update_inode_mapping_flags(BTRFS_I(inode)); - btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order(BTRFS_I(inode)); }
ret = btrfs_insert_inode_locked(inode);