From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 23 05:12:07 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7514E1065670 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 05:12:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ehrmann@gmail.com) Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com (yx-out-2324.google.com [74.125.44.28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C1D8FC17 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 05:12:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ehrmann@gmail.com) Received: by yx-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 8so1908642yxb.13 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:12:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=7LU29ujuhytC2OghA7QP6KGvFkmfvVmfB3bXw+dObHQ=; b=DjKKGk36IIuR8+DDQaRSCGQasKhrP16qXd7jy6ZVGO5FVMGlY9E91+HLMN97Whf2sV tJ626UAUC6MfTHzGQuv/l2ZG/zDHDNeGRz8ZrcBav5pnOKVKGmnVzVz8LU8rBkH/XkBL t31NxOx2mJQnXf1UOZ8brsoVzDhCDj4G3Fogo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Zx+OKYGBL3LxvpJg+exnJyzn0jUoiqiZjpNKAKqR4F0s4ZYbMK9n9px5ef6x1iR+Os F7uaR6EjysCx4Jtgw5uM1xrZEcLtkGunRcXBrXe5YOKuWSakJLDHeA/WNQA6BAeDjmjj KGiy3noHILGbOFEtR/XgSyUZsCWeoxJqelCwY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.93.19 with SMTP id q19mr496548anb.156.1232687526482; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:12:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6e0e5340901222108i6a5e300fte7fdd1a517fbe049@mail.gmail.com> References: <6e0e5340901151158n5108ba8ct6af8fb270b10b75b@mail.gmail.com> <6e0e5340901161521t30845197s9529fb5a55dbba13@mail.gmail.com> <6e0e5340901221324o33f1e2b1l53c842ebf9dad9a8@mail.gmail.com> <1de79840901221745r4149dc30yfcfcb8c8a24ad8ce@mail.gmail.com> <6e0e5340901222108i6a5e300fte7fdd1a517fbe049@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:12:06 -0800 Message-ID: <6e0e5340901222112x159409c5xd2fd93e32b020c0f@mail.gmail.com> From: David Ehrmann To: Michael Proto Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Pete French Subject: Re: zfs drive keeps failing between export and import X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 05:12:07 -0000 On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:08 PM, David Ehrmann wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Michael Proto wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:24 PM, David Ehrmann wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 3:21 PM, David Ehrmann wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Pete French >>>> wrote: >>>>>> a software problem before hardware. Both drives are encrypted geli >>>>>> devices. I tried to reproduce the error with 1GB disk images (vs >>>>> >>>>> This is probably a silly question, but are you sure that the drives >>>>> are not auto detaching ? I had big problems with a zfs mirror on top >>>>> of geli which turned out to be that drives mounted using "geli_devices" >>>>> in rc.conf will auto detach unless you set "geli_autodetach" to NO. >>>> >>>> Not silly at all. I didn't know that could be an issue, but they >>>> weren't mounted with "geli_devices," they were mounted by hand with >>>> "geli attach /dev/ad." I did not set the -d flag on attach, and >>>> I don't think I used the -l flag on detach, either. Listing the >>>> device says this: >>>> >>>> Geom name: ad10.eli >>>> EncryptionAlgorithm: AES-CBC >>>> KeyLength: 128 >>>> Crypto: hardware >>>> UsedKey: 0 >>>> Flags: NONE >>>> >>>> (and more stuff) >>>> >>>> One more interesting thing: I accidentally rebooted the system without >>>> any detaching/exporting (it involved a different, bad drive). When it >>>> came up, I was able to re-import tank without any problems. >>>> >>> >>> Ok, here's where it gets interesting: >>> >>> The next time I saw the import error, I ran zdb -l on the actual dev. >>> It couldn't find the labels. So I used dd to grab the first 4k of the >>> .eli device and the actual device. Once I got it working, I repeated. >>> The data in the first 4k of /dev/ad8 were all 0x00 both times. I'm >>> guessing this is reserved, or something. The data in the first 4k of >>> /dev/ad8.eli differed between runs (so zdb -l is probably right about >>> not finding the label). >>> >>> In the /dev/ad8.eli that zfs doesn't recognize, I found a 16 byte >>> string that was repeated a lot, but it was also repeated in another >>> place: the good /dev/ad10.eli (though the offsets were different). >>> The other weird thing: the good and bad /dev/ad8.eli look a lot alike: >>> one 16 byte string, then another that gets repeated, then another 16 >>> byte string randomly shows up at 0x200. >>> >>> Why the same data appear in the bad ad8.eli as the good ad10.eli, I'm >>> not sure (I do have the same password and no keyfile with geli), but >>> the patterns of data looking the same make me think something's wrong >>> with the encryption. It's using 128 bit AES-CBC, and these patterns >>> would not be hidden by it (128 bits == 16 bytes). >>> >>> I'm using a Via C7 CPU's padlock cryptographic accelerator, and geli >>> reports this. I'm guessing this is either a padlock or a geli bug. >>> >>> I can't reliably reproduce this problem, but doing it with padlock off >>> might be a good test. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>> >> >> I saw something similar (minus zfs) when I was playing with padlock >> and geli on my C7-Esther fileserver. When trying to mount a geli >> partition I'd intermittently get a bad decryption key error. Run the >> same command again to mount the partition and it'd work fine. This was >> using both password and key-file operations. IIRC when I disabled >> padlock acceleration it worked fine in my limited testing. That was >> 6.4, now that I'm on 7.1 it might be worth looking at again. > > I just got around to trying it without padlock. I tried to replicate > the problem 5 or 6 times, but no luck. > > This is 7.1. > > It *sounds* like a padlock problem, but I'd like to see it make the > same mistake with a file or memory backed md device. Anyway, that > this point, I can pretty much rule out zfs as the culprit. > Or geli... Any success (not intermittent) reports with a hifn or broadcom accelerator and geli?