From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] xfs: fix buffer shudown reference count mismatch
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:59:40 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121106195940.GA24575@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121106125949.GA32329@infradead.org>
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 07:59:49AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 10:47:41AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > I think that's irrelevant here - there will *never* be an IO waiter
> > at this point in time. This processing is in log buffer IO
> > completion context, so the buffers are still pinned in memory. Hence
> > anyone trying to do IO on it will be waiting in xfs_buf_wait_unpin()
> > and never get to xfs_buf_iowait(). And because xfs_buf_wait_unpin()
> > is called with the buffer lock held, we'll never do the failure
> > handling in xfs_buf_item_unpin until the buffer IO is completed and
> > it is unlocked.
>
> How do we manage to submit it synchronously then?
I don't follow what problem you are talking about here.
Fundamentally, races with IO are resolved like this regardless of
whether the racing Io is sync or async
xfs_buf_lock
make modifications
.....
xfs_buf_lock
.....
xfs_trans_commit
....
IOP_PIN()
IOP_UNLOCK()
xfs_buf_iorequest
xfs_buf_wait_unpin()
.....
<shutdown, no new buffers can get to xfs_buf_iorequest>
IOP_UNPIN(remove)
xfs_buf_item_unpin(remove)
wake_up_all(pin waiters)
xfs_buf_lock()
.....
submit IO
......
xfs_buf_ioend()
wakeup(b_iowait)
.....
xfs_buf_relse()
xfs_buf_hold
xfs_buf_stale
ASYNC
xfs_buf_ioend()
bp->b_iodone()
xfs_buf_rele
xfs_buf_ioend()
xfs_buf_rele
xfs_buf_free
What this also points out is that we shoul dbe checking for shutdown
after xfs_buf_wait_unpin(), too, because otherwise we are submitting
IO after the shutdown is initiated....
> The inode and dquot
> reclaim xfs_bwrite calls already wait for an unpin first, so I don't
> think these are the problem. The only other call on a live fs seems
> to xfs_qm_shake -> xfs_buf_delwri_submit, but that one does wait
> for the complete() call on b_iowait. I suspect we are hitting that
> and due to it skipping the wait if b_ioerror is set and waiting on
> multiple buffers that complete together might hide the issue.
We are in a shutdown situation. xfs_buf_delwri_submit() goes via
xfs_bdstrat_cb() which will stop any new IOs from being submitted
via this path. If it is blocked on the above case, then it is
also resolved by the above case...
> __xfs_buf_delwri_submit for the wait == true case also seems to be
> the only place that actually skips the ispinned check.
Sure, but that we're in a shutdown situation, so it doesn't matter -
the buffer will never get to xfs_buf_wait_unpin() because of the
shutdown check in xfs_bdstrat_cb().
I still don't see the problem you are trying to explain to me. Maybe
I'm just being dense....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-06 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-02 0:38 [PATCH 0/6] xfs: fixes for 3.7-rc3 Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 0:38 ` [PATCH 1/6] xfs: silence uninitialised f.file warning Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 13:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-02 21:23 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-11-02 0:38 ` [PATCH 2/6] xfs: growfs: don't read garbage for new secondary superblocks Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 0:38 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: invalidate allocbt blocks moved to the free list Dave Chinner
2012-10-09 19:11 ` [PATCH] xfs: report projid32bit feature in geometry call Eric Sandeen
2012-10-09 19:28 ` Carlos Maiolino
2012-10-09 19:45 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-11 0:02 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-10-30 19:43 ` Ben Myers
2012-10-30 19:44 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-11-08 16:12 ` Ben Myers
2012-11-02 21:23 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: invalidate allocbt blocks moved to the free list Mark Tinguely
2012-11-02 0:38 ` [PATCH 4/6] xfs: don't vmap inode cluster buffers during free Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 13:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-02 21:24 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-11-02 0:38 ` [PATCH 5/6] xfs: fix buffer shudown reference count mismatch Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 2:43 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 3:23 ` [PATCH 5/6 V2] " Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 13:17 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-11-02 13:13 ` [PATCH 5/6] " Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-02 17:10 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-11-02 23:47 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-06 12:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-06 19:59 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-11-02 0:38 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: fix reading of wrapped log data Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 13:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-02 23:51 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-02 21:24 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-11-07 20:56 ` [PATCH 0/6] xfs: fixes for 3.7-rc3 Dave Chinner
2012-11-08 16:34 ` Ben Myers
2012-11-08 16:15 ` Ben Myers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121106195940.GA24575@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.