The patch "Btrfs: fix protection between send and root deletion"
(
18f687d538449373c37c) does not actually prevent to delete the snapshot
and just takes care during background cleaning, but this seems rather
user unfriendly, this patch implements the idea presented in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg30813.html
- add an internal root_item flag to denote a dead root
- check if the send_in_progress is set and refuse to delete, otherwise
set the flag and proceed
- check the flag in send similar to the btrfs_root_readonly checks, for
all involved roots
The root lookup in send via btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name will check if the
root is really dead or not. If it is, ENOENT, aborted send. If it's
alive, it's protected by send_in_progress, send can continue.
CC: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
#define BTRFS_ROOT_SUBVOL_RDONLY (1ULL << 0)
+/*
+ * Internal in-memory flag that a subvolume has been marked for deletion but
+ * still visible as a directory
+ */
+#define BTRFS_ROOT_SUBVOL_DEAD (1ULL << 48)
+
struct btrfs_root_item {
struct btrfs_inode_item inode;
__le64 generation;
return (root->root_item.flags & cpu_to_le64(BTRFS_ROOT_SUBVOL_RDONLY)) != 0;
}
+static inline bool btrfs_root_dead(struct btrfs_root *root)
+{
+ return (root->root_item.flags & cpu_to_le64(BTRFS_ROOT_SUBVOL_DEAD)) != 0;
+}
+
/* struct btrfs_root_backup */
BTRFS_SETGET_STACK_FUNCS(backup_tree_root, struct btrfs_root_backup,
tree_root, 64);
struct btrfs_ioctl_vol_args *vol_args;
struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
struct btrfs_block_rsv block_rsv;
+ u64 root_flags;
u64 qgroup_reserved;
int namelen;
int ret;
if (err)
goto out;
+
err = mutex_lock_killable_nested(&dir->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
if (err == -EINTR)
goto out_drop_write;
}
mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
+
+ /*
+ * Don't allow to delete a subvolume with send in progress. This is
+ * inside the i_mutex so the error handling that has to drop the bit
+ * again is not run concurrently.
+ */
+ spin_lock(&dest->root_item_lock);
+ root_flags = btrfs_root_flags(&root->root_item);
+ if (root->send_in_progress == 0) {
+ btrfs_set_root_flags(&root->root_item,
+ root_flags | BTRFS_ROOT_SUBVOL_DEAD);
+ spin_unlock(&dest->root_item_lock);
+ } else {
+ spin_unlock(&dest->root_item_lock);
+ btrfs_warn(root->fs_info,
+ "Attempt to delete subvolume %llu during send",
+ root->root_key.objectid);
+ err = -EPERM;
+ goto out_dput;
+ }
+
err = d_invalidate(dentry);
if (err)
goto out_unlock;
out_up_write:
up_write(&root->fs_info->subvol_sem);
out_unlock:
+ if (err) {
+ spin_lock(&dest->root_item_lock);
+ root_flags = btrfs_root_flags(&root->root_item);
+ btrfs_set_root_flags(&root->root_item,
+ root_flags & ~BTRFS_ROOT_SUBVOL_DEAD);
+ spin_unlock(&dest->root_item_lock);
+ }
mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
if (!err) {
shrink_dcache_sb(root->fs_info->sb);
/*
* The subvolume must remain read-only during send, protect against
- * making it RW.
+ * making it RW. This also protects against deletion.
*/
spin_lock(&send_root->root_item_lock);
send_root->send_in_progress++;
}
sctx->send_root = send_root;
+ /*
+ * Unlikely but possible, if the subvolume is marked for deletion but
+ * is slow to remove the directory entry, send can still be started
+ */
+ if (btrfs_root_dead(sctx->send_root)) {
+ ret = -EPERM;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
sctx->clone_roots_cnt = arg->clone_sources_count;
sctx->send_max_size = BTRFS_SEND_BUF_SIZE;
spin_lock(&sctx->parent_root->root_item_lock);
sctx->parent_root->send_in_progress++;
- if (!btrfs_root_readonly(sctx->parent_root)) {
+ if (!btrfs_root_readonly(sctx->parent_root) ||
+ btrfs_root_dead(sctx->parent_root)) {
spin_unlock(&sctx->parent_root->root_item_lock);
srcu_read_unlock(&fs_info->subvol_srcu, index);
ret = -EPERM;