All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
To: Junhui Tang <tang.junhui.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: colyli@suse.de, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcache: treat stale && dirty keys as bad keys
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 09:01:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181218140157.GB7144@kmo-pixel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+NNRhE8438XuoZ25kdCRjYvZv6nHJU+Yoyg6hacWuptjWWDfA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 02:37:14PM +0800, Junhui Tang wrote:
> From 8ca52771f1d3b83ff55dc80ba633901a081963bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tang Junhui <tang.junhui.linux@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:38:26 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] bcache: treat stale && dirty keys as bad keys
> 
> Stale && dirty keys can be produced in the follow way:
> After writeback in write_dirty_finish(), dirty keys k1 will
> replace by clean keys k2
> ==>ret = bch_btree_insert(dc->disk.c, &keys, NULL, &w->key);
> ==>btree_insert_fn(struct btree_op *b_op, struct btree *b)
> ==>static int bch_btree_insert_node(struct btree *b,
>        struct btree_op *op,
>        struct keylist *insert_keys,
>        atomic_t *journal_ref,
> Then two steps:
> A) update k1 to k2 in btree node memory;
>    bch_btree_insert_keys(b, op, insert_keys, replace_key)
> B) Write the bset(contains k2) to cache disk by a 30s delay work
>    bch_btree_leaf_dirty(b, journal_ref).
> But before the 30s delay work write the bset to cache device,
> these things happend:
> A) GC works, and reclaim the bucket k2 point to;
> B) Allocator works, and invalidate the bucket k2 point to,
>    and increase the gen of the bucket, and place it into free_inc
>    fifo;
> C) Until now, the 30s delay work still does not finish work,
>    so in the disk, the key still is k1, it is dirty and stale
>    (its gen is smaller than the gen of the bucket). and then the
>    machine power off suddenly happens;
> D) When the machine power on again, after the btree reconstruction,
>    the stale dirty key appear.

Only prior to journal replay, right? Or did you uncover something more severe?

> In bch_extent_bad(), when expensive_debug_checks is off, it would
> treat the dirty key as good even it is stale keys, and it would
> cause bellow probelms:
> A) In read_dirty() it would cause machine crash:
>    BUG_ON(ptr_stale(dc->disk.c, &w->key, 0));
> B) It could be worse when reads hits stale dirty keys, it would
>    read old incorrect data.

Neither of these can happen until after journal replay is finished. Prior to
journal replay we expect to find stale dirty keys - if we find any after journal
replay then it's indicative of a real bug.

> 
> This patch tolerate the existence of these stale && dirty keys,
> and treat them as bad key in bch_extent_bad().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tang Junhui <tang.junhui.linux@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/md/bcache/extents.c | 14 ++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/extents.c b/drivers/md/bcache/extents.c
> index 1d09674..f9eb03c 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/extents.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/extents.c
> @@ -535,6 +535,7 @@ static bool bch_extent_bad(struct btree_keys *bk,
> const struct bkey *k)
>  {
>   struct btree *b = container_of(bk, struct btree, keys);
>   unsigned i, stale;
> + char buf[80];
> 
>   if (!KEY_PTRS(k) ||
>       bch_extent_invalid(bk, k))
> @@ -544,19 +545,20 @@ static bool bch_extent_bad(struct btree_keys
> *bk, const struct bkey *k)
>   if (!ptr_available(b->c, k, i))
>   return true;
> 
> - if (!expensive_debug_checks(b->c) && KEY_DIRTY(k))
> - return false;
> -
>   for (i = 0; i < KEY_PTRS(k); i++) {
>   stale = ptr_stale(b->c, k, i);
> 
> + if (stale && KEY_DIRTY(k)) {
> + bch_extent_to_text(buf, sizeof(buf), k);
> + pr_info("stale dirty pointer, stale %u, key: %s",
> +     stale,
> +     buf);
> + }
> +
>   btree_bug_on(stale > 96, b,
>        "key too stale: %i, need_gc %u",
>        stale, b->c->need_gc);
> 
> - btree_bug_on(stale && KEY_DIRTY(k) && KEY_SIZE(k),
> -      b, "stale dirty pointer");
> -
>   if (stale)
>   return true;
> 
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-18 14:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-18  6:37 [PATCH] bcache: treat stale && dirty keys as bad keys Junhui Tang
2018-12-18 14:01 ` Kent Overstreet [this message]
2018-12-19  1:30   ` Junhui Tang
2018-12-19  1:32   ` Junhui Tang
2018-12-19 11:32     ` Kent Overstreet
2018-12-20  8:40       ` Junhui Tang
2018-12-22 13:02 ` Coly Li

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=20181218140157.GB7144@kmo-pixel \
    --to=kent.overstreet@gmail.com \
    --cc=colyli@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tang.junhui.linux@gmail.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.