|Summary:||fsck.gfs2: segfault in pass1b|
|Product:||Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6||Reporter:||Robert Peterson <rpeterso>|
|Component:||cluster||Assignee:||Robert Peterson <rpeterso>|
|Status:||CLOSED ERRATA||QA Contact:||Cluster QE <mspqa-list>|
|Version:||6.1||CC:||ccaulfie, cluster-maint, djansa, edamato, fdinitto, jpayne, lhh, rpeterso, ssaha, swhiteho, teigland|
|Fixed In Version:||cluster-188.8.131.52-2.el6||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
When fsck.gfs2 resolves duplicate block references, if all block references are found to be invalid (no valid references are found), its reference list becomes empty. Some code in pass1b improperly tried to access references on the empty list. As a result, fsck.gfs2 would end abnormally with a segmentation fault. Code was added to pass1b to check for the list being empty. As a result, the segmentation fault no longer occurs and fsck.gfs2 proceeds normally.
|Last Closed:||2011-12-06 14:50:49 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
|Bug Depends On:||679076|
Description Robert Peterson 2011-02-21 14:19:55 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #679076 +++ Cloned for a RHEL6 crosswrite fix. Description of problem: While recently analyzing a customer's gfs2 metadata, I ran fsck.gfs2 and it segfaulted in pass1b. I tracked down the problem, and this bug is to track the problem and its fix. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): RHEL57 How reproducible: Unknown Steps to Reproduce: 1. Restore customer metadata 2. fsck.gfs2 -y /dev/device 3. Actual results: Segfault in pass1b Expected results: fsck.gfs2 should run to completion. Additional info: Patch available --- Additional comment from firstname.lastname@example.org on 2011-02-21 09:15:25 EST --- Created attachment 479925 [details] Patch to fix the problem The problem occurred when there were duplicate block references in a dinode but all references in the duplicate list are eventually deleted due to other corruption. The fix is an additional check whether the list is empty. --- Additional comment from email@example.com on 2011-02-21 09:16:28 EST --- Requesting ack flags for 5.7.
Comment 1 Robert Peterson 2011-02-22 22:40:09 UTC
I pushed the patch to the master branch of the gfs2-util git repo. I guess I'll have to wait to push it into the RHEL6 branch of cluster.git until 6.1 branches from RHEL6, unless management wants to squeeze it in.
Comment 2 Steve Whitehouse 2011-05-06 14:37:14 UTC
Can we get this into the rhel6 branch yet?
Comment 3 Robert Peterson 2011-05-06 15:14:25 UTC
RHEL61 still has not branched from RHEL6, so no. I'll bug Fabio when he's back from pto or Lon when he's back from Summit.
Comment 4 Robert Peterson 2011-06-03 12:55:35 UTC
Created attachment 502805 [details] Final patch This is the patch I pushed to the cluster.git repo for the RHEL6 branch.
Comment 5 Robert Peterson 2011-06-03 12:57:01 UTC
Since the RHEL6 branch is now open for business, I pushed the patch to it for inclusion into 6.2. I tested it on system gfs-i24c-01. Changing status to POST until it gets built.
Comment 8 Robert Peterson 2011-10-27 13:49:57 UTC
Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team. New Contents: When fsck.gfs2 resolves duplicate block references, if all block references are found to be invalid (no valid references are found), its reference list becomes empty. Some code in pass1b improperly tried to access references on the empty list. As a result, fsck.gfs2 would end abnormally with a segmentation fault. Code was added to pass1b to check for the list being empty. As a result, the segmentation fault no longer occurs and fsck.gfs2 proceeds normally.
Comment 9 Justin Payne 2011-11-08 17:10:37 UTC
Verified SanityOnly in cluster-184.108.40.206-23.el6 https://brewweb.devel.redhat.com/buildinfo?buildID=181570
Comment 10 errata-xmlrpc 2011-12-06 14:50:49 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1516.html