linux/fs, branch v3.8

Merge branch 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs

2013-02-08T01:06:46Z

Pull btrfs fixes from Chris Mason: "We've got corner cases for updating i_size that ceph was hitting, error handling for quotas when we run out of space, a very subtle snapshot deletion race, a crash while removing devices, and one deadlock between subvolume creation and the sb_internal code (thanks lockdep)." * 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs: Btrfs: move d_instantiate outside the transaction during mksubvol Btrfs: fix EDQUOT handling in btrfs_delalloc_reserve_metadata Btrfs: fix possible stale data exposure Btrfs: fix missing i_size update Btrfs: fix race between snapshot deletion and getting inode Btrfs: fix missing release of the space/qgroup reservation in start_transaction() Btrfs: fix wrong sync_writers decrement in btrfs_file_aio_write() Btrfs: do not merge logged extents if we've removed them from the tree btrfs: don't try to notify udev about missing devices

Btrfs: move d_instantiate outside the transaction during mksubvol

2013-02-06T17:11:10Z

Dave Sterba triggered a lockdep complaint about lock ordering between the sb_internal lock and the cleaner semaphore. btrfs_lookup_dentry() checks for orphans if we're looking up the inode for a subvolume, and subvolume creation is triggering the lookup with a transaction running. This commit moves the d_instantiate after the transaction closes. Signed-off-by: Chris Mason

Btrfs: fix EDQUOT handling in btrfs_delalloc_reserve_metadata

2013-02-06T14:24:40Z

When btrfs_qgroup_reserve returned a failure, we were missing a counter operation for BTRFS_I(inode)->outstanding_extents++, leading to warning messages about outstanding extents and space_info->bytes_may_use != 0. Additionally, the error handling code didn't take into account that we dropped the inode lock which might require more cleanup. Luckily, all the cleanup code we need is already there and can be shared with reserve_metadata_bytes, which is exactly what this patch does. Reported-by: Lev Vainblat Signed-off-by: Jan Schmidt Signed-off-by: Chris Mason

Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git for-chris into for-linus

2013-02-06T00:24:44Z

Btrfs: fix possible stale data exposure

2013-02-05T21:09:16Z

We specifically do not update the disk i_size if there are ordered extents outstanding for any area between the current disk_i_size and our ordered extent so that we do not expose stale data. The problem is the check we have only checks if the ordered extent starts at or after the current disk_i_size, which doesn't take into account an ordered extent that starts before the current disk_i_size and ends past the disk_i_size. Fix this by checking if the extent ends past the disk_i_size. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: fix missing i_size update

2013-02-05T21:09:14Z

If we have an ordered extent before the ordered extent we are currently completing that is after the current disk_i_size we will put our i_size update into that ordered extent so that we do not expose stale data. The problem is that if our disk i_size is updated past the previous ordered extent we won't update the i_size with the pending i_size update. So check the pending i_size update and if its above the current disk i_size we need to go ahead and try to update. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: fix race between snapshot deletion and getting inode

2013-02-05T21:09:13Z

While running snapshot testscript created by Mitch and David, the race between autodefrag and snapshot deletion can lead to corruption of dead_root list so that we can get crash on btrfs_clean_old_snapshots(). And besides autodefrag, scrub also does the same thing, ie. read root first and get inode. Here is the story(take autodefrag as an example): (1) when we delete a snapshot or subvolume, it will set its root's refs to zero and do a iput() on its own inode, and if this inode happens to be the only active in-meory one in root's inode rbtree, it will add itself to the global dead_roots list for later cleanup. (2) after (1), the autodefrag thread may read another inode for defrag and the inode is just in the deleted snapshot/subvolume, but all of these are without checking if the root is still valid(refs > 0). So the end up result is adding the deleted snapshot/subvolume's root to the global dead_roots list AGAIN. Fortunately, we already have a srcu lock to avoid the race, ie. subvol_srcu. So all we need to do is to take the lock to protect 'read root and get inode', since we synchronize to wait for the rcu grace period before adding something to the global dead_roots list. Reported-by: Mitch Harder Signed-off-by: Liu Bo Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: fix missing release of the space/qgroup reservation in start_transaction()

2013-02-05T21:09:11Z

When we fail to start a transaction, we need to release the reserved free space and qgroup space, fix it. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie Reviewed-by: Jan Schmidt Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: fix wrong sync_writers decrement in btrfs_file_aio_write()

2013-02-05T21:09:10Z

If the checks at the beginning of btrfs_file_aio_write() fail, we needn't decrease ->sync_writers, because we have not increased it. Fix it. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: do not merge logged extents if we've removed them from the tree

2013-02-05T21:09:03Z

You can run into this problem where if somebody is fsyncing and writing out the existing extents you will have removed the extent map from the em tree, but it's still valid for the current fsync so we go ahead and write it. The problem is we unconditionally try to merge it back into the em tree, but if we've removed it from the em tree that will cause use after free problems. Fix this to only merge if we are still a part of the tree. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik