add_pending_csums was added as part of the new data=ordered implementation in
e6dcd2dc9c48 ("Btrfs: New data=ordered implementation"). Even back then it
called the btrfs_csum_file_blocks which can fail but it never bothered handling
the failure. In ENOMEM situation this could lead to the filesystem failing to
write the checksums for a particular extent and not detect this. On read this
could lead to the filesystem erroring out due to crc mismatch. Fix it by
propagating failure from add_pending_csums and handling them
Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nbori...@suse.com>
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index e87ec11c0986..432bffdbb02f 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -2039,11 +2039,14 @@ static noinline int add_pending_csums(struct
btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
struct inode *inode, struct list_head *list)
{
struct btrfs_ordered_sum *sum;
+ int ret;
list_for_each_entry(sum, list, list) {
trans->adding_csums = true;
- btrfs_csum_file_blocks(trans,
+ ret = btrfs_csum_file_blocks(trans,
BTRFS_I(inode)->root->fs_info->csum_root, sum);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
trans->adding_csums = false;
}
return 0;
@@ -3051,7 +3054,11 @@ static int btrfs_finish_ordered_io(struct
btrfs_ordered_extent *ordered_extent)
goto out;
}
- add_pending_csums(trans, inode, &ordered_extent->list);
+ ret = add_pending_csums(trans, inode, &ordered_extent->list);
+ if (ret) {
+ btrfs_abort_transaction(trans, ret);
+ goto out;
+ }
btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, 0, ordered_extent);
ret = btrfs_update_inode_fallback(trans, root, inode);
--
2.7.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
