Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

hfsplus support #134

Open
velocityzen opened this issue Nov 28, 2018 · 0 comments
Open

hfsplus support #134

velocityzen opened this issue Nov 28, 2018 · 0 comments

Comments

@velocityzen
Copy link

There is no mac fs support :(

friendlyarm pushed a commit to friendlyarm/kernel-rockchip that referenced this issue Apr 2, 2020
commit ee63634 upstream.

Dm-zoned initializes reference counters of new chunk works with zero
value and refcount_inc() is called to increment the counter. However, the
refcount_inc() function handles the addition to zero value as an error
and triggers the warning as follows:

refcount_t: addition on 0; use-after-free.
WARNING: CPU: 7 PID: 1506 at lib/refcount.c:25 refcount_warn_saturate+0x68/0xf0
...
CPU: 7 PID: 1506 Comm: systemd-udevd Not tainted 5.4.0+ rockchip-linux#134
...
Call Trace:
 dmz_map+0x2d2/0x350 [dm_zoned]
 __map_bio+0x42/0x1a0
 __split_and_process_non_flush+0x14a/0x1b0
 __split_and_process_bio+0x83/0x240
 ? kmem_cache_alloc+0x165/0x220
 dm_process_bio+0x90/0x230
 ? generic_make_request_checks+0x2e7/0x680
 dm_make_request+0x3e/0xb0
 generic_make_request+0xcf/0x320
 ? memcg_drain_all_list_lrus+0x1c0/0x1c0
 submit_bio+0x3c/0x160
 ? guard_bio_eod+0x2c/0x130
 mpage_readpages+0x182/0x1d0
 ? bdev_evict_inode+0xf0/0xf0
 read_pages+0x6b/0x1b0
 __do_page_cache_readahead+0x1ba/0x1d0
 force_page_cache_readahead+0x93/0x100
 generic_file_read_iter+0x83a/0xe40
 ? __seccomp_filter+0x7b/0x670
 new_sync_read+0x12a/0x1c0
 vfs_read+0x9d/0x150
 ksys_read+0x5f/0xe0
 do_syscall_64+0x5b/0x180
 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
...

After this warning, following refcount API calls for the counter all fail
to change the counter value.

Fix this by setting the initial reference counter value not zero but one
for the new chunk works. Instead, do not call refcount_inc() via
dmz_get_chunk_work() for the new chunks works.

The failure was observed with linux version 5.4 with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL
enabled. Refcount rework was merged to linux version 5.5 by the
commit 168829a ("Merge branch 'locking-core-for-linus' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip"). After this
commit, CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL was removed and the failure was observed
regardless of kernel configuration.

Linux version 4.20 merged the commit 092b564 ("dm zoned: target: use
refcount_t for dm zoned reference counters"). Before this commit, dm
zoned used atomic_t APIs which does not check addition to zero, then this
fix is not necessary.

Fixes: 092b564 ("dm zoned: target: use refcount_t for dm zoned reference counters")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.4+
Signed-off-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
friendlyarm pushed a commit to friendlyarm/kernel-rockchip that referenced this issue Jun 15, 2021
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ]

Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable
bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can
confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds
to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be
wrong.

After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth
documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation
interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as
barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and
will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in
the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original
field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *),
*(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using
barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to
calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of
switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load.

Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code
before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests.

BEFORE
=====
 rockchip-linux#45: core_reloc: insn rockchip-linux#160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 rockchip-linux#46: core_reloc: insn rockchip-linux#167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 rockchip-linux#47: core_reloc: insn rockchip-linux#174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 rockchip-linux#48: core_reloc: insn rockchip-linux#178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 rockchip-linux#49: core_reloc: insn rockchip-linux#182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     157:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     159:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     160:       b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     161:       66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63>
     162:       16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65>
     163:       16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     164:       05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>:
     165:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     167:       69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     168:       05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>:
     169:       16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67>
     170:       16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     171:       05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>:
     172:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     174:       79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     175:       05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>:
     176:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     178:       71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     179:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>:
     180:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     182:       61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>:
     183:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     184:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     185:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     186:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     187:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>:
     188:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32

AFTER
=====

 rockchip-linux#30: core_reloc: insn rockchip-linux#132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 rockchip-linux#31: core_reloc: insn rockchip-linux#134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     129:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     131:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     132:       b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here                     ^^^
; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions
     133:       0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1
     134:       b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     135:       66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63>
     136:       16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65>
     137:       16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     138:       05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>:
     139:       69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     140:       05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>:
     141:       16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67>
     142:       16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     143:       05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>:
     144:       79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     145:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>:
     146:       71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     147:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69>

00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>:
     148:       61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>:
     149:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     150:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     151:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     152:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     153:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>:
     154:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323

Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210426192949.416837-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Joshua-Riek pushed a commit to Joshua-Riek/rockchip-kernel that referenced this issue Feb 6, 2024
)

* rk3588-fxblox-rk1a dd edp and user leds to dts

* Update rk3588-fxblox-rk1.dts
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant