From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mfo@canonical.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>,
Eric Desrochers <eric.desrochers@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] loop: fix I/O error on fsync() in detached loop devices
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 15:10:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210107071055.GA3900112@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAO9xwp0ad6Hs2AJOLKUn-oVSp+kwHKM67saxdwv0JsrSza+C7Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 08:33:50PM -0300, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 6:08 AM Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 10:54:19AM -0300, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote:
> > > There's an I/O error on fsync() in a detached loop device
> > > if it has been previously attached.
> > >
> > > The issue is write cache is enabled in the attach path in
> > > loop_configure() but it isn't disabled in the detach path;
> > > thus it remains enabled in the block device regardless of
> > > whether it is attached or not.
> > >
> > > Now fsync() can get an I/O request that will just be failed
> > > later in loop_queue_rq() as device's state is not 'Lo_bound'.
> > >
> > > So, disable write cache in the detach path.
> > >
> > > Test-case:
> > >
> > > # DEV=/dev/loop7
> > >
> > > # IMG=/tmp/image
> > > # truncate --size 1M $IMG
> > >
> > > # losetup $DEV $IMG
> > > # losetup -d $DEV
> > >
> > > Before:
> > >
> > > # strace -e fsync parted -s $DEV print 2>&1 | grep fsync
> > > fsync(3) = -1 EIO (Input/output error)
> > > Warning: Error fsyncing/closing /dev/loop7: Input/output error
> > > [ 982.529929] blk_update_request: I/O error, dev loop7, sector 0 op 0x1:(WRITE) flags 0x800 phys_seg 0 prio class 0
> > >
> > > After:
> > >
> > > # strace -e fsync parted -s $DEV print 2>&1 | grep fsync
> > > fsync(3) = 0
> >
> > But IO on detached loop should have been failed, right? The magic is
> > that submit_bio_checks() filters FLUSH request for queues which doesn't
> > support writeback cache, and always fake a normal completion.
> >
>
> Hey Ming, thanks for taking a look at this.
>
> Well, it depends -- currently read() works (without I/O errors) and
> write() fails (ENOSPC).
> Example tests are provided below.
read() actually returns 0 because of the following code in blkdev_read_iter():
if (pos >= size)
return 0;
>
> And that's consistent before and after attach/detach; so, I thought
> fsync() should follow.
>
> > I understand that the issue is that user becomes confused with this observation
> > because no such failure if they run 'parted -s /dev/loop0 print' on one detached
> > loop disk if it is never attached.
> >
>
> That is indeed one of the issues. There's also a monitoring/alerting
> perspective that
> would benefit; e.g., sosreport runs parted, it's run on data
> collection for support cases.
> Now, that I/O error message is thrown in the logs, and some mon/alert
> tools might not
> yet have filters to ignore (detached) loop devices, and alert. It'd be
> nice to deflect that.
IMO, if loop is detached, any IO should have been failed. However,
read/flush is just a bit special:
- blkdev_read_iter() always return 0 if the read is beyond the device
size(0)
- submit_bio(FLUSH) return successfully if the queue doesn't support
writeback cache.
>
> It's not a common issue, to be honest; but the consistency point
> seemed fair to me,
> as essentially the current code doesn't deinitialize something it
> previously initialized,
> and the block device is left running with that enabled regardless.
OK, looks it is fine to disable writeback cache in __loop_clr_fd().
BTW, just wondering why don't you disable WC unconditionally in
__loop_clr_fd() or clear it in the following way because WC can be
changed via sysfs?
if (test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_WC, &q->queue_flags))
blk_queue_write_cache(q, false, false);
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-07 7:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-05 13:54 [PATCH v2] loop: fix I/O error on fsync() in detached loop devices Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2021-01-06 9:07 ` Ming Lei
2021-01-06 23:33 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2021-01-07 7:10 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2021-01-07 18:20 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
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=20210107071055.GA3900112@T590 \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=eric.desrochers@canonical.com \
--cc=krisman@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mfo@canonical.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.