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 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).