lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 27 Apr 2023 19:19:35 +0800
From:   Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
To:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
CC:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
        <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
        Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...hat.com>,
        yangerkun <yangerkun@...wei.com>,
        Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [ext4 io hang] buffered write io hang in balance_dirty_pages

On 2023/4/27 18:01, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 02:36:51PM +0800, Baokun Li wrote:
>> On 2023/4/27 12:50, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> Hello Matthew,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 04:58:36AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 10:20:28AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>>> Hello Guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> I got one report in which buffered write IO hangs in balance_dirty_pages,
>>>>> after one nvme block device is unplugged physically, then umount can't
>>>>> succeed.
>>>> That's a feature, not a bug ... the dd should continue indefinitely?
>>> Can you explain what the feature is? And not see such 'issue' or 'feature'
>>> on xfs.
>>>
>>> The device has been gone, so IMO it is reasonable to see FS buffered write IO
>>> failed. Actually dmesg has shown that 'EXT4-fs (nvme0n1): Remounting
>>> filesystem read-only'. Seems these things may confuse user.
>>
>> The reason for this difference is that ext4 and xfs handle errors
>> differently.
>>
>> ext4 remounts the filesystem as read-only or even just continues, vfs_write
>> does not check for these.
> vfs_write may not find anything wrong, but ext4 remount could see that
> disk is gone, which might happen during or after remount, however.
>
>> xfs shuts down the filesystem, so it returns a failure at
>> xfs_file_write_iter when it finds an error.
>>
>>
>> ``` ext4
>> ksys_write
>>   vfs_write
>>    ext4_file_write_iter
>>     ext4_buffered_write_iter
>>      ext4_write_checks
>>       file_modified
>>        file_modified_flags
>>         __file_update_time
>>          inode_update_time
>>           generic_update_time
>>            __mark_inode_dirty
>>             ext4_dirty_inode ---> 2. void func, No propagating errors out
>>              __ext4_journal_start_sb
>>               ext4_journal_check_start ---> 1. Error found, remount-ro
>>      generic_perform_write ---> 3. No error sensed, continue
>>       balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited
>>        balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_flags
>>         balance_dirty_pages
>>          // 4. Sleeping waiting for dirty pages to be freed
>>          __set_current_state(TASK_KILLABLE)
>>          io_schedule_timeout(pause);
>> ```
>>
>> ``` xfs
>> ksys_write
>>   vfs_write
>>    xfs_file_write_iter
>>     if (xfs_is_shutdown(ip->i_mount))
>>       return -EIO;    ---> dd fail
>> ```
> Thanks for the info which is really helpful for me to understand the
> problem.
>
>>>> balance_dirty_pages() is sleeping in KILLABLE state, so kill -9 of
>>>> the dd process should succeed.
>>> Yeah, dd can be killed, however it may be any application(s), :-)
>>>
>>> Fortunately it won't cause trouble during reboot/power off, given
>>> userspace will be killed at that time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ming
>>>
>> Don't worry about that, we always set the current thread to TASK_KILLABLE
>>
>> while waiting in balance_dirty_pages().
> I have another concern, if 'dd' isn't killed, dirty pages won't be cleaned, and
> these (big amount)memory becomes not usable, and typical scenario could be USB HDD
> unplugged.
>
>
> thanks,
> Ming
Yes, it is unreasonable to continue writing data with the previously 
opened fd after
the file system becomes read-only, resulting in dirty page accumulation.

I provided a patch in another reply.
Could you help test if it can solve your problem?
If it can indeed solve your problem, I will officially send it to the 
email list.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Baokun Li
.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists