jbd: Fix assertion failure in commit code due to lacking transaction credits

ext3 users of data=journal mode with blocksize < pagesize were occasionally
hitting assertion failure in journal_commit_transaction() checking whether the
transaction has at least as many credits reserved as buffers attached.  The
core of the problem is that when a file gets truncated, buffers that still need
checkpointing or that are attached to the committing transaction are left with
buffer_mapped set. When this happens to buffers beyond i_size attached to a
page stradding i_size, subsequent write extending the file will see these
buffers and as they are mapped (but underlying blocks were freed) things go
awry from here.

The assertion failure just coincidentally (and in this case luckily as we would
start corrupting filesystem) triggers due to journal_head not being properly
cleaned up as well.

Under some rare circumstances this bug could even hit data=ordered mode users.
There the assertion won't trigger and we would end up corrupting the
filesystem.

We fix the problem by unmapping buffers if possible (in lots of cases we just
need a buffer attached to a transaction as a place holder but it must not be
written out anyway). And in one case, we just have to bite the bullet and wait
for transaction commit to finish.

Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

1 files changed, 34 insertions, 11 deletions

diff --git a/fs/jbd/commit.c b/fs/jbd/commit.c
index 52c15c776029..86b39b167c23 100644
--- a/fs/jbd/commit.c
+++ b/fs/jbd/commit.c
@@ -86,7 +86,12 @@ nope:
 static void release_data_buffer(struct buffer_head *bh)
 {
 	if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(buffer_dirty(bh));
 		clear_buffer_freed(bh);
+		clear_buffer_mapped(bh);
+		clear_buffer_new(bh);
+		clear_buffer_req(bh);
+		bh->b_bdev = NULL;
 		release_buffer_page(bh);
 	} else
 		put_bh(bh);
@@ -866,17 +871,35 @@ restart_loop:
 		 * there's no point in keeping a checkpoint record for
 		 * it. */
 
-		/* A buffer which has been freed while still being
-		 * journaled by a previous transaction may end up still
-		 * being dirty here, but we want to avoid writing back
-		 * that buffer in the future after the "add to orphan"
-		 * operation been committed,  That's not only a performance
-		 * gain, it also stops aliasing problems if the buffer is
-		 * left behind for writeback and gets reallocated for another
-		 * use in a different page. */
-		if (buffer_freed(bh) && !jh->b_next_transaction) {
-			clear_buffer_freed(bh);
-			clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
+		/*
+		 * A buffer which has been freed while still being journaled by
+		 * a previous transaction.
+		 */
+		if (buffer_freed(bh)) {
+			/*
+			 * If the running transaction is the one containing
+			 * "add to orphan" operation (b_next_transaction !=
+			 * NULL), we have to wait for that transaction to
+			 * commit before we can really get rid of the buffer.
+			 * So just clear b_modified to not confuse transaction
+			 * credit accounting and refile the buffer to
+			 * BJ_Forget of the running transaction. If the just
+			 * committed transaction contains "add to orphan"
+			 * operation, we can completely invalidate the buffer
+			 * now. We are rather throughout in that since the
+			 * buffer may be still accessible when blocksize <
+			 * pagesize and it is attached to the last partial
+			 * page.
+			 */
+			jh->b_modified = 0;
+			if (!jh->b_next_transaction) {
+				clear_buffer_freed(bh);
+				clear_buffer_jbddirty(bh);
+				clear_buffer_mapped(bh);
+				clear_buffer_new(bh);
+				clear_buffer_req(bh);
+				bh->b_bdev = NULL;
+			}
 		}
 
 		if (buffer_jbddirty(bh)) {