linux-kernel - Re: [6.2][regression] after commit 947a629988f191807d2d22ba63ae18259bb645c5 btrfs volume periodical forced switch to readonly after a lot of disk writes

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]

Message-ID: <9d56a546-ea4f-83cb-4efb-093af270544b@gmx.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:05:51 +0800
From:   Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com>
To:     Mikhail Gavrilov <mikhail.v.gavrilov@...il.com>
Cc:     Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>, dsterba@...e.com,
        Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [6.2][regression] after commit
 947a629988f191807d2d22ba63ae18259bb645c5 btrfs volume periodical forced
 switch to readonly after a lot of disk writes



On 2022/12/29 08:08, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 4:31 AM Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com> wrote:
>>
>> Are you using qgroup? If so it may be worthy trying disabling qgroup.
> 
> I do not use quota.
> And looks like my distro does not use quita by default.
> ❯ btrfs qgroup show -f /
> ERROR: can't list qgroups: quotas not enabled
> 
>> But for newer kernel, qgroup hang should only happen when dropping large
>> snapshot, I don't know if podman pull would cause older snapshots to be
>> deleted...
> 
> It is not a regression, it also happened on older kernels.
> But it is really annoying when the browser process waits when "podman
> pull" writes changes to disk.
> In fact, I have been waiting for 5 years for caching of slow HDDs by
> using the cache on the SSD, but apparently I can’t wait.
> And I started slowly buying expensive large SSDs to replace the big
> HDD. I still can’t find time to connect D5 P5316 30.72 Tb to the
> primary workstation.
> I want to make a video review of it. I understand this is an expensive
> solution and not suitable for everyone, unlike an affordable SDD
> cache.
> 
This is really sad to hear that.

For now, I only have several guesses on how this could happen.

- Extra seeks between metadata and data chunks
   You can try with mixed block groups, but this needs mkfs time tuning.

- Extra inlined extents causing too much metadata overhead
   You can disable inline extents using max_inline=0 as mount options.
   But that only affects newly created files, not the existing ones.

Otherwise, using bcache may be a solution.

For now I'm not aware of any HDD specific tests, other than zoned 
devices, thus the performance problem can be really hard to debug.

Thanks,
Qu