From: Yun Zhou <yun.zhou@windriver.com>
To: <clm@fb.com>, <dsterba@suse.com>
Cc: <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<yun.zhou@windriver.com>
Subject: [PATCH] btrfs: wait for ordered extents before buffered write fallback in direct IO
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 10:14:56 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260625021456.724803-1-yun.zhou@windriver.com> (raw)
When btrfs_direct_write() falls back to buffered IO after a failed DIO
attempt, it may race with the asynchronous completion of DIO ordered
extents. This leads to a BUG_ON in insert_ordered_extent() due to
overlapping ordered extents in the per-inode rb-tree.
The race sequence is:
1. DIO creates an ordered extent via btrfs_dio_iomap_begin()
2. Page fault occurs (nofault=true), no bio is submitted (submitted=0)
3. btrfs_dio_iomap_end() truncates and finishes the OE asynchronously
via btrfs_finish_ordered_extent() which queues work
4. iomap returns 0, retry logic faults in pages and retries DIO
5. Second DIO attempt also fails, code reaches buffered: label
6. btrfs_buffered_write() dirties pages for the same range
7. btrfs_fdatawrite_range() triggers writeback
8. run_delalloc_nocow() -> fallback_to_cow() -> cow_file_range()
tries to insert a new ordered extent for the same file offset
9. The DIO ordered extent hasn't been removed from the rb-tree yet
(btrfs_finish_ordered_io running async in workqueue) -> BUG_ON
Fix this by waiting for any pending ordered extents in the target range
before starting the buffered write.
Reported-by: syzbot+ba2afde329fc27e3f22e@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=ba2afde329fc27e3f22e
Fixes: acf9ed3a6c00 ("btrfs: retry faulting in the pages after a zero sized short direct write")
Signed-off-by: Yun Zhou <yun.zhou@windriver.com>
---
fs/btrfs/direct-io.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/direct-io.c b/fs/btrfs/direct-io.c
index 460326d34143..e8ac9492844c 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/direct-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/direct-io.c
@@ -844,6 +844,7 @@ ssize_t btrfs_direct_write(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp;
struct inode *inode = file_inode(file);
struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = inode_to_fs_info(inode);
+ struct btrfs_ordered_extent *ordered;
loff_t pos;
ssize_t written = 0;
ssize_t written_buffered;
@@ -1025,6 +1026,29 @@ ssize_t btrfs_direct_write(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
}
pos = iocb->ki_pos;
+
+ /*
+ * The DIO path may have created ordered extent(s) that are still being
+ * processed asynchronously in a work queue. We must wait for them to
+ * be fully completed and removed from the rb-tree before doing a
+ * buffered write to the same or overlapping range; otherwise the
+ * buffered writeback path (run_delalloc_nocow -> fallback_to_cow ->
+ * cow_file_range) may try to insert a new ordered extent that conflicts
+ * with the still-pending DIO one, triggering a BUG_ON in
+ * insert_ordered_extent().
+ *
+ * This happens when DIO creates an ordered extent but has a short write
+ * (submitted < length in btrfs_dio_iomap_end()), which truncates and
+ * finishes the ordered extent asynchronously while we fall back to
+ * buffered IO for the same range.
+ */
+ while ((ordered = btrfs_lookup_ordered_range(BTRFS_I(inode),
+ (u64)(pos - written),
+ (u64)written + iov_iter_count(from))) != NULL) {
+ btrfs_start_ordered_extent(ordered);
+ btrfs_put_ordered_extent(ordered);
+ }
+
written_buffered = btrfs_buffered_write(iocb, from);
if (written_buffered < 0) {
ret = written_buffered;
--
2.43.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-06-25 2:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-25 2:14 Yun Zhou [this message]
2026-06-25 5:13 ` Qu Wenruo
2026-06-25 5:17 ` Qu Wenruo
2026-06-25 6:46 ` Zhou, Yun
2026-06-25 6:51 ` Qu Wenruo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260625021456.724803-1-yun.zhou@windriver.com \
--to=yun.zhou@windriver.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®