From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
"Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
"linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"darrick.wong@oracle.com" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 5.3-rc1 regression with XFS log recovery
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 16:13:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190820081325.GA21032@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190820055320.GB27501@lst.de>
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 07:53:20AM +0200, hch@lst.de wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 02:41:35PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > With the following debug patch. Based on that I think I'll just
> > > formally submit the vmalloc switch as we're at -rc5, and then we
> > > can restart the unaligned slub allocation drama..
> >
> > This still doesn't make sense to me, because the pmem and brd code
> > have no aligment limitations in their make_request code - they can
> > handle byte adressing and should not have any problem at all with
> > 8 byte aligned memory in bios.
> >
> > Digging a little furhter, I note that both brd and pmem use
> > identical mechanisms to marshall data in and out of bios, so they
> > are likely to have the same issue.
> >
> > So, brd_make_request() does:
> >
> > bio_for_each_segment(bvec, bio, iter) {
> > unsigned int len = bvec.bv_len;
> > int err;
> >
> > err = brd_do_bvec(brd, bvec.bv_page, len, bvec.bv_offset,
> > bio_op(bio), sector);
> > if (err)
> > goto io_error;
> > sector += len >> SECTOR_SHIFT;
> > }
> >
> > So, the code behind bio_for_each_segment() splits multi-page bvecs
> > into individual pages, which are passed to brd_do_bvec(). An
> > unaligned 4kB io traces out as:
> >
> > [ 121.295550] p,o,l,s 00000000a77f0146,768,3328,0x7d0048
> > [ 121.297635] p,o,l,s 000000006ceca91e,0,768,0x7d004e
> >
> > i.e. page offset len sector
> > 00000000a77f0146 768 3328 0x7d0048
> > 000000006ceca91e 0 768 0x7d004e
> >
> > You should be able to guess what the problems are from this.
The problem should be that offset of '768' is passed to bio_add_page().
It should be one slub buffer used for block IO, looks an old unsolved
problem.
> >
> > Both pmem and brd are _sector_ based. We've done a partial sector
> > copy on the first bvec, then the second bvec has started the copy
> > from the wrong offset into the sector we've done a partial copy
> > from.
> >
> > IOWs, no error is reported when the bvec buffer isn't sector
> > aligned, no error is reported when the length of data to copy was
> > not a multiple of sector size, and no error was reported when we
> > copied the same partial sector twice.
>
> Yes. I think bio_for_each_segment is buggy here, as it should not
> blindly split by pages.
bio_for_each_segment() just keeps the original interface as before
introducing multi-page bvec.
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-20 8:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190818071128.GA17286@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20190818074140.GA18648@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20190818173426.GA32311@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20190819000831.GX6129@dread.disaster.area>
[not found] ` <20190819034948.GA14261@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20190819041132.GA14492@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20190819042259.GZ6129@dread.disaster.area>
[not found] ` <20190819042905.GA15613@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20190819044012.GA15800@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20190820044135.GC1119@dread.disaster.area>
2019-08-20 5:53 ` 5.3-rc1 regression with XFS log recovery hch
2019-08-20 7:44 ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-20 8:13 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2019-08-20 9:24 ` Ming Lei
2019-08-20 16:30 ` Verma, Vishal L
2019-08-20 21:44 ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-20 22:08 ` Verma, Vishal L
2019-08-20 23:53 ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-21 2:19 ` Ming Lei
2019-08-21 1:56 ` Ming Lei
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=20190820081325.GA21032@ming.t460p \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.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).