All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* ESTALE errors: What can be done to handle this problem.
@ 2012-04-10 16:03 Sachin Prabhu
  2012-04-10 16:11   ` Jeff Layton
  2012-04-10 16:57 ` Myklebust, Trond
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sachin Prabhu @ 2012-04-10 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Linux NFS mailing list; +Cc: jlayton, bfields, steved

The change introduced by upstream patch
4f48af45842c6e78ab958c90344d3c940db4da15
means that the lookup call for a file will return a inode as being valid
as long as 
1) The directory containing the file was revalidated ie. the cached
attributes are valid and it was found that there was no change in the
directory since the attributes of the file were cached.
2) We aren't doing a OPEN call or the LOOKUP_REVAL flag is not set.

We no longer check to see if the file attributes themselves are valid.
This patch was introduced in 2.6.23.

This increases the chances of ESTALE errors on GETATTR calls if
1) The attributes of the directory containing the file is refreshed on
the client and the values stored in the attribute cache are still valid
when the subsequent steps are run.
2) The file is deleted on the server.
3) The cached attributes of the file on the client have expired.
4) We stat the file.

For a GETATTR call
1) The lookup will return the inode as valid.
2) The subsequent getattr call will notice that the attributes are no
longer valid and will attempt a on the wire call which fails with an
ESTALE. 
We cannot recover at this point and return an ESTALE error to userland.

We can easily reproduce this with the following reproducer.

On the server
# while true; do date >b ; rm -f a ; mv b a;sleep 3; done

On the client
#while true; do stat a 2>&1 | grep Stale ; done

We do not see this problem in kernels not containing this patch since we
revalidate the file inode before we return the inode as valid in the
lookup call. Here  we notice that the attribute cache is no longer valid
and do an over the wire GETATTR call to fetch the latest file
attributes. An ESTALE error in the lookup phase is handled by redoing
the lookup call. This still has a potential of failing with an ESTALE if
the attribute cache expires between the lookup and the getattr calls.
But chances of this happening are relatively low.

A workaround is to disable attribute caching which is accompanied by a
huge performance hit. A proper fix would be to just redo the lookup call
in case we ever encounter an ESTALE error with a limit to the number of
retries which can be made. However this approach will involve a bit of
work in the VFS layer. We have a user provided patch which does just
this but is incomplete.

Is this approach feasible? If not, what else can be done to avoid this
problem.

Sachin Prabhu


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-04-10 20:03 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-04-10 16:03 ESTALE errors: What can be done to handle this problem Sachin Prabhu
2012-04-10 16:11 ` Jeff Layton
2012-04-10 16:11   ` Jeff Layton
2012-04-10 16:57 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-04-10 19:01   ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-04-10 19:59     ` Peter Staubach

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.