From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2] f2fs: fix to keep isolation of atomic write
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 11:06:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YActuF2es8IGJfGj@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3923906d-f208-f6c2-f121-5e77e8fb6b28@huawei.com>
On 01/15, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/1/15 5:53, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 12/30, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > ThreadA ThreadB
> > > - f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write
> > > - write
> > > - f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write
> > > - f2fs_commit_inmem_pages
> > > - f2fs_drop_inmem_pages
> > > - f2fs_drop_inmem_pages
> > > - __revoke_inmem_pages
> > > - f2fs_vm_page_mkwrite
> > > - set_page_dirty
> > > - tag ATOMIC_WRITTEN_PAGE and add page
> > > to inmem_pages list
> > > - clear_inode_flag(FI_ATOMIC_FILE)
> > > - f2fs_vm_page_mkwrite
> > > - set_page_dirty
> > > - f2fs_update_dirty_page
> > > - f2fs_trace_pid
> > > - tag inmem page private to pid
> >
> > Hmm, how about removing fs/f2fs/trace.c to make private more complicated
> > like this? I think we can get IO traces from tracepoints.
>
> Hmm, actually, there is are issues, one is the trace IO, the other is the
> race issue (atomic_start,commit,drop vs mkwrite) which can make isolation
> semantics of transaction be broken.
>
> Or can we avoid atomic file racing with file mmap?
No, we can't. We may need to find other way to check the race. :)
>
> - atomic_start - file_mmap
> - inode_lock
> - if (FI_ATOMIC_FILE) return
> - inode_lock
> - if (FI_MMAP_FILE) return
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > > - truncate
> > > - f2fs_invalidate_page
> > > - set page->mapping to NULL
> > > then it will cause panic once we
> > > access page->mapping
> > >
> > > The root cause is we missed to keep isolation of atomic write in the case
> > > of commit_atomic_write vs mkwrite, let commit_atomic_write helds i_mmap_sem
> > > lock to avoid this issue.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
> > > ---
> > > v2:
> > > - use i_mmap_sem to avoid mkwrite racing with below flows:
> > > * f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write
> > > * f2fs_drop_inmem_pages
> > > * f2fs_commit_inmem_pages
> > >
> > > fs/f2fs/file.c | 3 +++
> > > fs/f2fs/segment.c | 7 +++++++
> > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/file.c b/fs/f2fs/file.c
> > > index 4e6d4b9120a8..a48ec650d691 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/file.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/file.c
> > > @@ -2050,6 +2050,7 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write(struct file *filp)
> > > goto out;
> > > down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > + down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > /*
> > > * Should wait end_io to count F2FS_WB_CP_DATA correctly by
> > > @@ -2060,6 +2061,7 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write(struct file *filp)
> > > inode->i_ino, get_dirty_pages(inode));
> > > ret = filemap_write_and_wait_range(inode->i_mapping, 0, LLONG_MAX);
> > > if (ret) {
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > goto out;
> > > }
> > > @@ -2073,6 +2075,7 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write(struct file *filp)
> > > /* add inode in inmem_list first and set atomic_file */
> > > set_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_FILE);
> > > clear_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_REVOKE_REQUEST);
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > f2fs_update_time(F2FS_I_SB(inode), REQ_TIME);
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > > index d8570b0359f5..dab870d9faf6 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > > @@ -327,6 +327,8 @@ void f2fs_drop_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
> > > struct f2fs_inode_info *fi = F2FS_I(inode);
> > > + down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > +
> > > while (!list_empty(&fi->inmem_pages)) {
> > > mutex_lock(&fi->inmem_lock);
> > > __revoke_inmem_pages(inode, &fi->inmem_pages,
> > > @@ -344,6 +346,8 @@ void f2fs_drop_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > sbi->atomic_files--;
> > > }
> > > spin_unlock(&sbi->inode_lock[ATOMIC_FILE]);
> > > +
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > }
> > > void f2fs_drop_inmem_page(struct inode *inode, struct page *page)
> > > @@ -467,6 +471,7 @@ int f2fs_commit_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > f2fs_balance_fs(sbi, true);
> > > down_write(&fi->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > + down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > f2fs_lock_op(sbi);
> > > set_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_COMMIT);
> > > @@ -478,6 +483,8 @@ int f2fs_commit_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > clear_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_COMMIT);
> > > f2fs_unlock_op(sbi);
> > > +
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > up_write(&fi->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > return err;
> > > --
> > > 2.29.2
> > .
> >
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chao@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] f2fs: fix to keep isolation of atomic write
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 11:06:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YActuF2es8IGJfGj@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3923906d-f208-f6c2-f121-5e77e8fb6b28@huawei.com>
On 01/15, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/1/15 5:53, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 12/30, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > ThreadA ThreadB
> > > - f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write
> > > - write
> > > - f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write
> > > - f2fs_commit_inmem_pages
> > > - f2fs_drop_inmem_pages
> > > - f2fs_drop_inmem_pages
> > > - __revoke_inmem_pages
> > > - f2fs_vm_page_mkwrite
> > > - set_page_dirty
> > > - tag ATOMIC_WRITTEN_PAGE and add page
> > > to inmem_pages list
> > > - clear_inode_flag(FI_ATOMIC_FILE)
> > > - f2fs_vm_page_mkwrite
> > > - set_page_dirty
> > > - f2fs_update_dirty_page
> > > - f2fs_trace_pid
> > > - tag inmem page private to pid
> >
> > Hmm, how about removing fs/f2fs/trace.c to make private more complicated
> > like this? I think we can get IO traces from tracepoints.
>
> Hmm, actually, there is are issues, one is the trace IO, the other is the
> race issue (atomic_start,commit,drop vs mkwrite) which can make isolation
> semantics of transaction be broken.
>
> Or can we avoid atomic file racing with file mmap?
No, we can't. We may need to find other way to check the race. :)
>
> - atomic_start - file_mmap
> - inode_lock
> - if (FI_ATOMIC_FILE) return
> - inode_lock
> - if (FI_MMAP_FILE) return
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > > - truncate
> > > - f2fs_invalidate_page
> > > - set page->mapping to NULL
> > > then it will cause panic once we
> > > access page->mapping
> > >
> > > The root cause is we missed to keep isolation of atomic write in the case
> > > of commit_atomic_write vs mkwrite, let commit_atomic_write helds i_mmap_sem
> > > lock to avoid this issue.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
> > > ---
> > > v2:
> > > - use i_mmap_sem to avoid mkwrite racing with below flows:
> > > * f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write
> > > * f2fs_drop_inmem_pages
> > > * f2fs_commit_inmem_pages
> > >
> > > fs/f2fs/file.c | 3 +++
> > > fs/f2fs/segment.c | 7 +++++++
> > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/file.c b/fs/f2fs/file.c
> > > index 4e6d4b9120a8..a48ec650d691 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/file.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/file.c
> > > @@ -2050,6 +2050,7 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write(struct file *filp)
> > > goto out;
> > > down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > + down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > /*
> > > * Should wait end_io to count F2FS_WB_CP_DATA correctly by
> > > @@ -2060,6 +2061,7 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write(struct file *filp)
> > > inode->i_ino, get_dirty_pages(inode));
> > > ret = filemap_write_and_wait_range(inode->i_mapping, 0, LLONG_MAX);
> > > if (ret) {
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > goto out;
> > > }
> > > @@ -2073,6 +2075,7 @@ static int f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write(struct file *filp)
> > > /* add inode in inmem_list first and set atomic_file */
> > > set_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_FILE);
> > > clear_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_REVOKE_REQUEST);
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > f2fs_update_time(F2FS_I_SB(inode), REQ_TIME);
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > > index d8570b0359f5..dab870d9faf6 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > > @@ -327,6 +327,8 @@ void f2fs_drop_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
> > > struct f2fs_inode_info *fi = F2FS_I(inode);
> > > + down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > +
> > > while (!list_empty(&fi->inmem_pages)) {
> > > mutex_lock(&fi->inmem_lock);
> > > __revoke_inmem_pages(inode, &fi->inmem_pages,
> > > @@ -344,6 +346,8 @@ void f2fs_drop_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > sbi->atomic_files--;
> > > }
> > > spin_unlock(&sbi->inode_lock[ATOMIC_FILE]);
> > > +
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > }
> > > void f2fs_drop_inmem_page(struct inode *inode, struct page *page)
> > > @@ -467,6 +471,7 @@ int f2fs_commit_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > f2fs_balance_fs(sbi, true);
> > > down_write(&fi->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > + down_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > f2fs_lock_op(sbi);
> > > set_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_COMMIT);
> > > @@ -478,6 +483,8 @@ int f2fs_commit_inmem_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > > clear_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_COMMIT);
> > > f2fs_unlock_op(sbi);
> > > +
> > > + up_write(&F2FS_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem);
> > > up_write(&fi->i_gc_rwsem[WRITE]);
> > > return err;
> > > --
> > > 2.29.2
> > .
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-19 19:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-30 7:55 [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2] f2fs: fix to keep isolation of atomic write Chao Yu
2020-12-30 7:55 ` Chao Yu
2021-01-06 22:28 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-06 22:28 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-06 22:57 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-06 22:57 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-11 16:32 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-11 16:32 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-12 2:59 ` Chao Yu
2021-01-12 2:59 ` Chao Yu
2021-01-12 22:32 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-12 22:32 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-13 1:30 ` Chao Yu
2021-01-13 1:30 ` Chao Yu
2021-01-14 21:53 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-14 21:53 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-15 7:59 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2021-01-15 7:59 ` Chao Yu
2021-01-19 19:06 ` Jaegeuk Kim [this message]
2021-01-19 19:06 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-20 1:18 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2021-01-20 1:18 ` Chao Yu
2021-01-28 16:21 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-28 16:21 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2021-01-29 1:38 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2021-01-29 1:38 ` Chao Yu
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=YActuF2es8IGJfGj@google.com \
--to=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yuchao0@huawei.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.