Disappearing directories
Hello,
I think I might have stumbled across a bug in jffs2, that caused our JFFS2 NAND flash partitions to lose subdirectories now and then.
The embedded system in question was running on linux 2.6.38.2, but using the nandsim module, I was able to recreate the bug on workstations running linux 3.0.0 as well as linux 3.2.0.
The attached script should demonstrate the bug, however since the ways of the garbage collector are not exactly deterministic, it might not work every time. When the bug hits, the following lines can be found in dmesg:
Quoted 5 lines
[ 7917.087199] JFFS2 notice: (9354) jffs2_build_xattr_subsystem: complete building xattr subsystem, 0 of xdatum (0 unchecked, 0 orphan) and 0 of xref (0 dead, 0 orphan) found. [ 7917.433015] JFFS2 error: (9409) jffs2_build_inode_pass1: child dir "subdir" (ino #6) of dir ino #2 appears to be a hard link [ 7917.433058] JFFS2 notice: (9409) jffs2_build_xattr_subsystem: complete building xattr subsystem, 0 of xdatum (0 unchecked, 0 orphan) and 0 of xref (0 dead, 0 orphan) found. [ 7917.436272] JFFS2 warning: (9411) jffs2_get_inode_nodes: Eep. No valid nodes for ino #6. [ 7917.436277] JFFS2 warning: (9411) jffs2_do_read_inode_internal: no data nodes found for ino #6
Here is, what I think happens:
"mkdir tmpdir" creates inode 2 and links to it from inode 1 using the name tmpdir. This entry shares an eraseblock with the DELETE[12] files. "mkdir tmpdir/subdir" creates inode 6 and links to it from inode 2 using the name tmpdir. This entry shares an eraseblock with the KEEP[12] files. "mv tmpdir/subdir ." and "rmdir tmpdir" create three consecutive log entries:
- create new link to inode 6 from inode 1 using the name subdir
- delete entry named subdir from inode 2
- delete entry named tmpdir from inode 1
These these three steps share an eraseblock with DELETE[34]
Now after "rm DELETE*", the creation of inode 6 and the link from inode 2 to it share an eraseblock with lots of valid data, while all the other entries sit in very dirty eraseblocks. These eraseblocks are very likely to be garbage collected during the following "cp ../rnd DELETE" sequence.
If that happens, inode 2 as well as the link to it vanish. The deletion of the link from inode 2 to inode 6 also disappears. However the creation of a link from inode 2 to inode 6 still remains in flash, since it is "protected" by the heap of valid data.
This does not cause any trouble as long as the filesystem stays mounted. However if you unmount the partition at this point and then remount it, jffs2 can't get around the fact, that there are now two links to inode 6, even if one is from a directory, that itself doesn't exist anymore.
Best Regards,
i. A. Christoph Mammitzsch
Signature · 7 lines
Symeo GmbH Professor-Messerschmitt-Str. 3 85579 Neubiberg / München phone: +49 (89) 6607796-301 Symeo GmbH; Managing Directors: Dirk Brunnengräber, Christoph Rommel; Registered Office: Munich; Commercial Register: Munich, HRB 157340
#!/bin/sh
# load needed modules modprobe nandsim first_id_byte=0x2c second_id_byte=0xa1 third_id_byte=0x80 fourth_id_byte=0x15 parts=128 modprobe mtdblock
# generate some arbitrary data dd if=/dev/urandom of=rnd bs=2048 count=64
# clean and mount simulated NAND partition flash_erase /dev/mtd0 0 0 mkdir -p mnt_jffs2 mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock0 mnt_jffs2
# set up a critical node structure cd mnt_jffs2 mkdir tmpdir cp ../rnd DELETE1 cp ../rnd DELETE2 cp ../rnd KEEP1 mkdir tmpdir/subdir cp ../rnd KEEP2 cp ../rnd DELETE3 mv tmpdir/subdir . rmdir tmpdir cp ../rnd DELETE4 rm DELETE* # and excercise the garbage collector cp ../rnd DELETE1 cp ../rnd DELETE2 cp ../rnd DELETE3 cp ../rnd DELETE4 cp ../rnd DELETE5 cp ../rnd DELETE6 cp ../rnd DELETE7 cp ../rnd DELETE8 cp ../rnd DELETE9 cp ../rnd DELETE1 cp ../rnd DELETE2 cp ../rnd DELETE3 cp ../rnd DELETE4 cp ../rnd DELETE5 cp ../rnd DELETE6 cp ../rnd DELETE7 cp ../rnd DELETE8 cp ../rnd DELETE9 cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE cp ../rnd DELETE rm DELETE* cd ..
# unmount and remount partition. Notice how ls barfs after remount, but not before. ls -l mnt_jffs2 umount mnt_jffs2 mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock0 mnt_jffs2 ls -l mnt_jffs2
# unmount again for next run umount mnt_jffs2
Re: Disappearing directories (jffs2 on nand flash)
Am 04.07.2014 19:00, schrieb Christoph Mammitzsch:
Quoted 3 lines
The embedded system in question was running on linux 2.6.38.2, but using the nandsim module, I was able to recreate the bug on workstations running linux 3.0.0 as well as linux 3.2.0.
Update: I compiled the newest linux kernel (commit 812c5fa82bae9f377f49000d7636c19a8b61735c) and ran the test script on that kernel. The bug still showed 9 out of 10 times.
Regards,
Christoph Mammitzsch
Re: Disappearing directories (jffs2 on nand flash)
Hello,
I am a little astonished at the amount of feedback I got for my bugreport. Apparently jffs2 losing entire directories is not as big a deal as I thought. Does that mean that JFFS2 is dead and I should use another flash filesystem instead, or did I simply post on the wrong mailing list?
Regards,
Christoph Mammitzsch
Re: Disappearing directories (jffs2 on nand flash)
Quoted 7 lines · Christoph Mammitzsch
Hello,
I am a little astonished at the amount of feedback I got for my bugreport. Apparently jffs2 losing entire directories is not as big a deal as I thought. Does that mean that JFFS2 is dead and I should use another flash filesystem instead, or did I simply post on the wrong mailing list?
Is there any reason why you are not using UBIFS?
Signature · 2 lines
Thanks, //richard
Re: Disappearing directories (jffs2 on nand flash)
Am 03.08.2014 01:13, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 7 lines · Christoph Mammitzsch
Hello,
I am a little astonished at the amount of feedback I got for my bugreport. Apparently jffs2 losing entire directories is not as big a deal as I thought. Does that mean that JFFS2 is dead and I should use another flash filesystem instead, or did I simply post on the wrong mailing list?
Is there any reason why you are not using UBIFS?
We introduced our first linux based product 2006, so UBIFS was not an option. Our second linux based product was designed in 2011. Back then UBIFS was still relatively new, and it seemed beneficial to keep differences between our two products minimal, so we kept using JFFS2.
Switching to UBIFS now means we would have to update and test quite a lot of scripts. And providing an update for existing stations would be even more problematic. Therefore I was hoping for a bugfix, so we could just deliver a new kernel image and be done with it.
Regards,
Christoph Mammitzsch
Richard Weinberger
maintainerRe: Disappearing directories (jffs2 on nand flash)
Am 05.08.2014 11:22, schrieb Christoph Mammitzsch:
Quoted 18 lines
Am 03.08.2014 01:13, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 7 lines · Christoph Mammitzsch
Hello,
I am a little astonished at the amount of feedback I got for my bugreport. Apparently jffs2 losing entire directories is not as big a deal as I thought. Does that mean that JFFS2 is dead and I should use another flash filesystem instead, or did I simply post on the wrong mailing list?
Is there any reason why you are not using UBIFS?
We introduced our first linux based product 2006, so UBIFS was not an option. Our second linux based product was designed in 2011. Back then UBIFS was still relatively new, and it seemed beneficial to keep differences between our two products minimal, so we kept using JFFS2.
Quoted 4 lines
Switching to UBIFS now means we would have to update and test quite a lot of scripts. And providing an update for existing stations would be even more problematic. Therefore I was hoping for a bugfix, so we could just deliver a new kernel image and be done with it.
I can understand your decisions.
TBH jffs2 is more of less abandoned, don't expect anyone to fix issues fast.
Is the issue you see a regression?
If you can find the first bad commit it might give someone a hint... git bisect will help you.
Thanks,
//richard