dm-devel.redhat.com archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: "Mears, Morgan" <Morgan.Mears@netapp.com>
Cc: "dm-devel@redhat.com" <dm-devel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: dm-cache: can the same cache be used with multiple origin devices?
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:35:37 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130722143537.GA13965@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130715195911.GC15172@redhat.com>

On Mon, Jul 15 2013 at  3:59pm -0400,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 15 2013 at  3:01pm -0400,
> Mears, Morgan <Morgan.Mears@netapp.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > In reference to dm-cache: can the same cache and metadata devices be
> > used with multiple origin devices?  This can be configured, and we've
> > done some tests that appear to show that it works - we're looking for
> > confirmation (or otherwise).
> 
> It is _not_ supported.
>  
> > Here's an example test setup to clarify -- ssd_metadata and ssd_blocks
> > are being used to cache sdc and sdd.  In testing, different patterns
> > were written to areas of sdc_cached and  sdd_cached; afterwards, the
> > contents of sdc and sdd were as expected.
> > 
> > dmsetup create sdc_cached --table '0 4194304 cache /dev/mapper/ssd_metadata /dev/mapper/ssd_blocks /dev/sdc 512 1 writethrough default 0'
> > dmsetup create sdd_cached --table '0 4194304 cache /dev/mapper/ssd_metadata /dev/mapper/ssd_blocks /dev/sdd 512 1 writethrough default 0'
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> The current cache target obviously fails to detect that the metadata or
> data devices are already in use.  But that doesn't mean it is safe to
> utilize the cache in this mode (I'll have a think about where the code
> will break down).  But the cache is managed/written in a manner that
> only assumes a single backing origin for each cache.

The dm-cache code is inherently unsafe to use in the above configuration
because it results in disjoint tasks accessing the same metadata
device.  This is inherently racey because cmd->root_lock (metadata) and
cache->lock (cache device) are completely independent.

So things like tearing down one cache device (sdc_cached) while
issuing discards to the other (sdd_cached) would be one example of
competing tasks stepping all over one another.  More fundamental actions
like allocating a new cache block is racey.  Etc.

There are many other potential problems -- you apparently have just been
"lucky" not to hit them yet.  These races would likely become much more
transparent if you created 10 sdX_cached devices that share the same
metadata device and you then data integrity sensitive workloads against
each sdX_cached device (like repeat linux.git checkouts or even netapp's
dt).

Mike

      reply	other threads:[~2013-07-22 14:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-15 19:01 dm-cache: can the same cache be used with multiple origin devices? Mears, Morgan
2013-07-15 19:59 ` Mike Snitzer
2013-07-22 14:35   ` Mike Snitzer [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=20130722143537.GA13965@redhat.com \
    --to=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=Morgan.Mears@netapp.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).