From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Bill <billstuff2001@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: raid5 (re)-add recovery data corruption
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 12:14:32 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140702121432.3966fdfa@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53B2D2B1.4050807@sbcglobal.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7265 bytes --]
On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 10:24:33 -0500 Bill <billstuff2001@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 06/29/2014 10:40 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:23:35 +1000 NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 28 Jun 2014 18:43:00 -0500 Bill <billstuff2001@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 06/22/2014 08:36 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> >>>> On Sat, 21 Jun 2014 00:31:39 -0500 Bill<billstuff2001@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Neil,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm running a test on 3.14.8 and seeing data corruption after a recovery.
> >>>>> I have this array:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> md5 : active raid5 sdc1[2] sdb1[1] sda1[0] sde1[4] sdd1[3]
> >>>>> 16777216 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/5] [UUUUU]
> >>>>> bitmap: 0/1 pages [0KB], 2048KB chunk
> >>>>>
> >>>>> with an xfs filesystem on it:
> >>>>> /dev/md5 on /hdtv/data5 type xfs
> >>>>> (rw,noatime,barrier,swalloc,allocsize=256m,logbsize=256k,largeio)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and I do this in a loop:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. start writing 1/4 GB files to the filesystem
> >>>>> 2. fail a disk. wait a bit
> >>>>> 3. remove it. wait a bit
> >>>>> 4. add the disk back into the array
> >>>>> 5. wait for the array to sync and the file writes to finish
> >>>>> 6. checksum the files.
> >>>>> 7. wait a bit and do it all again
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The checksum QC will eventually fail, usually after a few hours.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My last test failed after 4 hours:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 18:51:48 - mdadm /dev/md5 -f /dev/sdc1
> >>>>> 18:51:58 - mdadm /dev/md5 -r /dev/sdc1
> >>>>> 18:52:06 - start writing 3 files
> >>>>> 18:52:08 - mdadm /dev/md5 -a /dev/sdc1
> >>>>> 18:52:18 - array recovery done
> >>>>> 18:52:23 - writes finished. QC failed for one of three files.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> dmesg shows no errors and the disks are operating normally.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If I "check" /dev/md5 it shows mismatch_cnt = 896
> >>>>> If I dump the raw data on sd[abcde]1 underneath the bad file, it shows
> >>>>> sd[abde]1 are correct, and sdc1 has some chunks of old data from a
> >>>>> previous file.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If I fail sdc1, --zero-superblock it, and add it, it then syncs and the
> >>>>> QC is correct.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So somehow is seems like md is loosing track of some changes which need
> >>>>> to be
> >>>>> written to sdc1 in the recovery. But rarely - in this case it failed
> >>>>> after 175 cycles.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do you have any idea what could be happening here?
> >>>> No. As you say, it looks like md is not setting a bit in the bitmap
> >>>> correctly, or ignoring one that is set, or maybe clearing one that shouldn't
> >>>> be cleared.
> >>>> The last is most likely I would guess.
> >>> Neil,
> >>>
> >>> I'm still digging through this but I found something that might help
> >>> narrow it
> >>> down - the bitmap stays dirty after the re-add and recovery is complete:
> >>>
> >>> Filename : /dev/sde1
> >>> Magic : 6d746962
> >>> Version : 4
> >>> UUID : 609846f8:ad08275f:824b3cb4:2e180e57
> >>> Events : 5259
> >>> Events Cleared : 5259
> >>> State : OK
> >>> Chunksize : 2 MB
> >>> Daemon : 5s flush period
> >>> Write Mode : Normal
> >>> Sync Size : 4194304 (4.00 GiB 4.29 GB)
> >>> Bitmap : 2048 bits (chunks), 2 dirty (0.1%)
> >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>>
> >>> This is after 1/2 hour idle. sde1 was the one removed / re-added, but
> >>> all five disks show the same bitmap info, and the event count matches
> >>> that of
> >>> the array (5259). At this point the QC check fails.
> >>>
> >>> Then I manually failed, removed and re-added /dev/sde1, and shortly the
> >>> array
> >>> synced the dirty chunks:
> >>>
> >>> Filename : /dev/sde1
> >>> Magic : 6d746962
> >>> Version : 4
> >>> UUID : 609846f8:ad08275f:824b3cb4:2e180e57
> >>> Events : 5275
> >>> Events Cleared : 5259
> >>> State : OK
> >>> Chunksize : 2 MB
> >>> Daemon : 5s flush period
> >>> Write Mode : Normal
> >>> Sync Size : 4194304 (4.00 GiB 4.29 GB)
> >>> Bitmap : 2048 bits (chunks), 0 dirty (0.0%)
> >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>>
> >>> Now the QC check succeeds and an array "check" shows no mismatches.
> >>>
> >>> So it seems like md is ignoring a set bit in the bitmap, which then gets
> >>> noticed
> >>> with the fail / remove / re-add sequence.
> >> Thanks, that helps a lot ... maybe.
> >>
> >> I have a theory. This patch explains it and should fix it.
> >> I'm not sure this is the patch I will go with if it works, but it will help
> >> confirm my theory.
> >> Can you test it?
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> NeilBrown
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
> >> index 34846856dbc6..27387a3740c8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
> >> @@ -7906,6 +7906,15 @@ void md_check_recovery(struct mddev *mddev)
> >> clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_CHECK, &mddev->recovery);
> >> clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED, &mddev->recovery);
> >> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_RECOVER, &mddev->recovery);
> >> + /* If there is a bitmap, we need to make sure
> >> + * all writes that started before we added a spare
> >> + * complete before we start doing a recovery.
> >> + * Otherwise the write might complete and set
> >> + * a bit in the bitmap after the recovery has
> >> + * checked that bit and skipped that region.
> >> + */
> >> + mddev->pers->quiesce(mddev, 1);
> >> + mddev->pers->quiesce(mddev, 0);
> >> } else if (mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector) {
> >> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_SYNC, &mddev->recovery);
> >> clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_RECOVER, &mddev->recovery);
> >>
> > Don't even bother trying that - it will definitely deadlock.
> >
> > Please try this instead.
> >
> > NeilBrown
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
> > index 34846856dbc6..f8cd0bd83402 100644
> > --- a/drivers/md/md.c
> > +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
> > @@ -7501,6 +7501,16 @@ void md_do_sync(struct md_thread *thread)
> > rdev->recovery_offset < j)
> > j = rdev->recovery_offset;
> > rcu_read_unlock();
> > +
> > + /* If there is a bitmap, we need to make sure
> > + * all writes that started before we added a spare
> > + * complete before we start doing a recovery.
> > + * Otherwise the write might complete and set
> > + * a bit in the bitmap after the recovery has
> > + * checked that bit and skipped that region.
> > + */
> > + mddev->pers->quiesce(mddev, 1);
> > + mddev->pers->quiesce(mddev, 0);
> > }
> >
> > printk(KERN_INFO "md: %s of RAID array %s\n", desc, mdname(mddev));
>
> My recent tests all failed within an hour, and with this patch it's still
> running after 24 hours, so it looks promising. I'll leave it running and let
> you know if anything bad happens.
>
That's good enough for me - thanks.
I'll send off a proper patch.
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-02 2:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-21 5:31 raid5 (re)-add recovery data corruption Bill
2014-06-23 1:36 ` NeilBrown
2014-06-23 13:43 ` Bill
2014-06-28 23:43 ` Bill
2014-06-30 3:23 ` NeilBrown
2014-06-30 3:40 ` NeilBrown
2014-07-01 15:24 ` Bill
2014-07-02 2:14 ` NeilBrown [this message]
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=20140702121432.3966fdfa@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=billstuff2001@sbcglobal.net \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/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.