From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Fix re-use of EWOULDBLOCK during read on dm-mirror
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 20:53:26 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121207095326.GI27172@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50C11E95.4050502@suse.com>
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 05:39:17PM -0500, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> When using lvconvert to convert a linear mapping to a dm-raid1 mirror,
> we encountered issues where the log would be flooded with messages like:
>
> metadata I/O error: block 0xee7060 ("xfs_trans_read_buf") error 11 numblks 8
>
> The cause is that dm-mirror (and striping, and others) will return
> -EWOULDBLOCK for readahead requests while the mirror is rebuilding.
That's nasty - since when has DM been doing this? I doubt anything
handles a EAGAIN error from the storage layer properly - it's not
an error the filesystem expects from the lower layers at all.
> XFS's
> end_io routine caches the errno and then xfs_buf_iowait bails out early
> when it encounters it after issuing the i/o request.
That doesn't sound right. when XFS issues buffer readahead, it does
not wait for it to complete. i.e. we never get to xfs_buf_iowait()
on readahead buffers.
If something then issues a read on the buffer that failed the
readahead, then we enter xfs_buf_iowait() after reissuing the IO.
If it's aborting because of a stale EWOULDBLOCK as a result of
readahead, then the problem is either:
- failed readahead should not be leaving an error in
b_error; or
- the read IO did not zero b_error before starting the IO
> The I/O eventually
> succeeds and the endio routine resets bp->b_error,
AFAICT, it's a different IO that succeeds (i.e. the resubmitted one
that is being waited for), not the same one.
> but the original read
> request has already returned -EWOULDBLOCK to the user and added the log
> message above to the kernel log, freaking everyone out.
>
> This patch ignores EWOULDBLOCK when deciding whether to wait for the I/O
> to complete and tries again, allowing the read to succeed as expected.
Which does not appear to be the correct fix - preventing failed
readahead from leaving a stale error on the buffer seems like the
right thing to do here...
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:[~2012-12-07 9:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-06 22:39 [PATCH] xfs: Fix re-use of EWOULDBLOCK during read on dm-mirror Jeff Mahoney
2012-12-07 9:53 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-12-10 1:12 ` Dave Chinner
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=20121207095326.GI27172@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jeffm@suse.com \
--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.