| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090901080615.GQ12579@kernel.dk>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 10:06:15 +0200
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
chris.mason@...cle.com, david@...morbit.com, hch@...radead.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jack@...e.cz, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v15
On Tue, Sep 01 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 01 2009, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 09:41:26PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Here's the 15th version of the writeback patches.
> > > >
> > > > The test-bdi branch of ext4.git tree is a combination of the patches I
> > > > plan to push once the merge window opens, plus v15 per-bdi patches.
> > > > On the ext4 call I've recruited some ext4 developers to do some
> > > > testing and benchmarking *before* the merge window opens.
> > >
> > > Great, thanks a lot for that!
> > >
> > > > I've found something potentially wrong with the writeback. It was
> > > > careful to sync the disk before shutting down the system, and I got
> > > > the following error.
> > > >
> > > > [ 660.499155] ext4_da_writepages: jbd2_start: 32768 pages, ino 41; err -30
> > > > [ 660.505664] Pid: 1848, comm: flush-8:0 Not tainted 2.6.31-rc8-01474-geef6bd0 #362
> > > > [ 660.512402] Call Trace:
> > > > [ 660.514982] [<c064412f>] ? printk+0x14/0x16
> > > > [ 660.518851] [<c023ac4a>] ext4_da_writepages+0x213/0x40e
> > > > [ 660.523356] [<c023aa37>] ? ext4_da_writepages+0x0/0x40e
> > > > [ 660.528383] [<c01b65a8>] do_writepages+0x28/0x39
> > > > [ 660.533534] [<c01f1e07>] writeback_single_inode+0x15c/0x346
> > > > [ 660.538401] [<c0165b23>] ? down_read_trylock+0x3e/0x48
> > > > [ 660.542921] [<c01f2892>] generic_sync_wb_inodes+0x2ab/0x37b
> > > > [ 660.547805] [<c01f2a2a>] wb_writeback+0xc8/0xfa
> > > > [ 660.551975] [<c01f2abb>] wb_do_writeback+0x5f/0x118
> > > > [ 660.556333] [<c01f2b95>] bdi_writeback_task+0x21/0x92
> > > > [ 660.560838] [<c01c0f5d>] bdi_start_fn+0x63/0xb2
> > > > [ 660.565647] [<c01c0efa>] ? bdi_start_fn+0x0/0xb2
> > > > [ 660.569710] [<c0162363>] kthread+0x73/0x78
> > > > [ 660.573528] [<c01622f0>] ? kthread+0x0/0x78
> > > > [ 660.577355] [<c011e6f3>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> > > >
> > > > ... and a very similar failure for inode 354
> > > >
> > > > [ 660.582215] ext4_da_writepages: jbd2_start: 32768 pages, ino 354; err -30
> > > >
> > > > Inode 41 is /var/lib/urandom/random-seed, and inode 354 is
> > > > /var/run/syslogd.pid.
> > > >
> > > > The failure occurs if I build w/o the ext4 "next" patches, and the
> > > > failure does not happen if I take build v2.6.31-rc8 without per-bdi
> > > > patches (with or without the ext4 patches). At a guess it looks like
> > > > the bdi threads are trying to write out the dirty files that were
> > > > written in the shutdown scripts, *after* the file system has been made
> > > > read-only in preparation for unmounting the file system in question.
> > >
> > > OK, that's definitely something that I will look into today. It isn't
> > > necessarily a writeback bug, but it does rather smell like it.
> >
> > I can reproduce, looks like it's not getting the sync on ro remount. Fix
> > should be included shortly :-)
>
> I see what is going on now... From the remount sync path, it's hitting:
>
> if (!down_read_trylock(&inode->i_sb->s_umount)) {
> requeue_io(inode);
> continue;
> }
>
> in generic_sync_wb_inodes(), so it's not actually getting writing out
> the dirty inodes for the remount.
>
> do_remount()
> down_write(&sb->s_umount);
> do_remount_sb();
> sync_filesystem(sb);
> __sync_filesystem(sb, 0);
> __sync_filesystem(sb, 1);
> sync_inodes_sb(sb, 1);
> sync_sb_inodes(wbc);
> generic_sync_sb_inodes();
>
> Jan, any ideas on how best to get around that?
How about something like this? I wish there was a better solution,
though.
diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index 5430d4e..9703136 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -550,20 +550,11 @@ static void generic_sync_wb_inodes(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
*/
if (inode_dirtied_after(inode, start))
break;
- /*
- * If this fs is currently being u/remounted, leave the
- * inode alone
- */
- if (!down_read_trylock(&inode->i_sb->s_umount)) {
- requeue_io(inode);
- continue;
- }
BUG_ON(inode->i_state & (I_FREEING | I_CLEAR));
__iget(inode);
pages_skipped = wbc->pages_skipped;
writeback_single_inode(inode, wbc);
- up_read(&inode->i_sb->s_umount);
if (wbc->pages_skipped != pages_skipped) {
/*
* writeback is not making progress due to locked
@@ -987,7 +978,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__mark_inode_dirty);
* on the writer throttling path, and we get decent balancing between many
* throttled threads: we don't want them all piling up on inode_sync_wait.
*/
-void generic_sync_sb_inodes(struct writeback_control *wbc)
+static void __generic_sync_sb_inodes(struct writeback_control *wbc)
{
if (wbc->bdi)
bdi_start_writeback(wbc);
@@ -1039,6 +1030,25 @@ void generic_sync_sb_inodes(struct writeback_control *wbc)
}
}
+
+void generic_sync_sb_inodes(struct writeback_control *wbc)
+{
+ struct super_block *sb = wbc->sb;
+
+ if (sb) {
+ spin_lock(&sb_lock);
+ sb->s_count++;
+ spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
+ }
+
+ __generic_sync_sb_inodes(wbc);
+
+ if (sb) {
+ spin_lock(&sb_lock);
+ __put_super_and_need_restart(sb);
+ spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
+ }
+}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(generic_sync_sb_inodes);
static void sync_sb_inodes(struct writeback_control *wbc)
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists