* [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time @ 2018-07-26 9:15 Qu Wenruo 2018-07-27 1:10 ` Misono Tomohiro 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Qu Wenruo @ 2018-07-26 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-btrfs Between btrfs_quota_enable() finished and rescan kicked in, there is a small window that quota status has (ON | INCONSISTENT) bits set but without RESCAN bits set. And transaction is committed inside the window and then power loss happens, we will have a quota tree with all qgroup numbers set to 0, and not RESCAN bit set. At next mount time, qgroup rescan will not kick in due to the missing of RESCAN bit, user needs to kick in rescan manually. This patch will fix it by setting RESCAN bit at btrfs_quota_enable(), so even after power loss we will still kick in rescan automatically. Suggested-by: Misono Tomohiro <misono.tomohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> --- fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c index c25dc47210a3..13c1c7dd278d 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c @@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, btrfs_set_qgroup_status_generation(leaf, ptr, trans->transid); btrfs_set_qgroup_status_version(leaf, ptr, BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_VERSION); fs_info->qgroup_flags = BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_ON | - BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT; + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT | + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN; btrfs_set_qgroup_status_flags(leaf, ptr, fs_info->qgroup_flags); btrfs_set_qgroup_status_rescan(leaf, ptr, 0); @@ -987,7 +988,7 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, fs_info->quota_root = quota_root; set_bit(BTRFS_FS_QUOTA_ENABLED, &fs_info->flags); spin_unlock(&fs_info->qgroup_lock); - ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 1); + ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 0); if (!ret) { qgroup_rescan_zero_tracking(fs_info); btrfs_queue_work(fs_info->qgroup_rescan_workers, -- 2.18.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time 2018-07-26 9:15 [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time Qu Wenruo @ 2018-07-27 1:10 ` Misono Tomohiro 2018-07-27 1:19 ` Qu Wenruo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Misono Tomohiro @ 2018-07-27 1:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs On 2018/07/26 18:15, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Between btrfs_quota_enable() finished and rescan kicked in, there is a > small window that quota status has (ON | INCONSISTENT) bits set but > without RESCAN bits set. > > And transaction is committed inside the window and then power loss > happens, we will have a quota tree with all qgroup numbers set to 0, and > not RESCAN bit set. > > At next mount time, qgroup rescan will not kick in due to the missing of > RESCAN bit, user needs to kick in rescan manually. > > This patch will fix it by setting RESCAN bit at btrfs_quota_enable(), > so even after power loss we will still kick in rescan automatically. > > Suggested-by: Misono Tomohiro <misono.tomohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c > index c25dc47210a3..13c1c7dd278d 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c > @@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > btrfs_set_qgroup_status_generation(leaf, ptr, trans->transid); > btrfs_set_qgroup_status_version(leaf, ptr, BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_VERSION); > fs_info->qgroup_flags = BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_ON | > - BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT; > + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT | > + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN; > btrfs_set_qgroup_status_flags(leaf, ptr, fs_info->qgroup_flags); > btrfs_set_qgroup_status_rescan(leaf, ptr, 0); > > @@ -987,7 +988,7 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > fs_info->quota_root = quota_root; > set_bit(BTRFS_FS_QUOTA_ENABLED, &fs_info->flags); > spin_unlock(&fs_info->qgroup_lock); > - ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 1); > + ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 0); > if (!ret) { > qgroup_rescan_zero_tracking(fs_info); > btrfs_queue_work(fs_info->qgroup_rescan_workers, > This is what I think at first, but is it ok not holding fs_info->qgroup_ioctl_lock in brfs_qgroup_rescan() as you concerned in previous thread? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time 2018-07-27 1:10 ` Misono Tomohiro @ 2018-07-27 1:19 ` Qu Wenruo 2018-07-27 1:43 ` Misono Tomohiro 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Qu Wenruo @ 2018-07-27 1:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Misono Tomohiro, linux-btrfs [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2564 bytes --] On 2018年07月27日 09:10, Misono Tomohiro wrote: > On 2018/07/26 18:15, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> Between btrfs_quota_enable() finished and rescan kicked in, there is a >> small window that quota status has (ON | INCONSISTENT) bits set but >> without RESCAN bits set. >> >> And transaction is committed inside the window and then power loss >> happens, we will have a quota tree with all qgroup numbers set to 0, and >> not RESCAN bit set. >> >> At next mount time, qgroup rescan will not kick in due to the missing of >> RESCAN bit, user needs to kick in rescan manually. >> >> This patch will fix it by setting RESCAN bit at btrfs_quota_enable(), >> so even after power loss we will still kick in rescan automatically. >> >> Suggested-by: Misono Tomohiro <misono.tomohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 5 +++-- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >> index c25dc47210a3..13c1c7dd278d 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >> @@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_generation(leaf, ptr, trans->transid); >> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_version(leaf, ptr, BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_VERSION); >> fs_info->qgroup_flags = BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_ON | >> - BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT; >> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT | >> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN; >> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_flags(leaf, ptr, fs_info->qgroup_flags); >> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_rescan(leaf, ptr, 0); >> >> @@ -987,7 +988,7 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> fs_info->quota_root = quota_root; >> set_bit(BTRFS_FS_QUOTA_ENABLED, &fs_info->flags); >> spin_unlock(&fs_info->qgroup_lock); >> - ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 1); >> + ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 0); >> if (!ret) { >> qgroup_rescan_zero_tracking(fs_info); >> btrfs_queue_work(fs_info->qgroup_rescan_workers, >> > > This is what I think at first, but is it ok not holding fs_info->qgroup_ioctl_lock > in brfs_qgroup_rescan() as you concerned in previous thread? I think it's OK, since we have larger mutex (subvol_sem) for quota_enable/disable() so there will be no concurrency modifying flags. And we're holding trans handler from btrfs_ioctl_quota_ctl(), transaction won't be committed in btrfs_quota_enable(). So I think it's OK. Thanks, Qu [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time 2018-07-27 1:19 ` Qu Wenruo @ 2018-07-27 1:43 ` Misono Tomohiro 2018-07-27 6:09 ` Qu Wenruo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Misono Tomohiro @ 2018-07-27 1:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs On 2018/07/27 10:19, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2018年07月27日 09:10, Misono Tomohiro wrote: >> On 2018/07/26 18:15, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>> Between btrfs_quota_enable() finished and rescan kicked in, there is a >>> small window that quota status has (ON | INCONSISTENT) bits set but >>> without RESCAN bits set. >>> >>> And transaction is committed inside the window and then power loss >>> happens, we will have a quota tree with all qgroup numbers set to 0, and >>> not RESCAN bit set. >>> >>> At next mount time, qgroup rescan will not kick in due to the missing of >>> RESCAN bit, user needs to kick in rescan manually. >>> >>> This patch will fix it by setting RESCAN bit at btrfs_quota_enable(), >>> so even after power loss we will still kick in rescan automatically. >>> >>> Suggested-by: Misono Tomohiro <misono.tomohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> >>> --- >>> fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 5 +++-- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>> index c25dc47210a3..13c1c7dd278d 100644 >>> --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>> @@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_generation(leaf, ptr, trans->transid); >>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_version(leaf, ptr, BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_VERSION); >>> fs_info->qgroup_flags = BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_ON | >>> - BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT; >>> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT | >>> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN; >>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_flags(leaf, ptr, fs_info->qgroup_flags); >>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_rescan(leaf, ptr, 0); >>> >>> @@ -987,7 +988,7 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>> fs_info->quota_root = quota_root; >>> set_bit(BTRFS_FS_QUOTA_ENABLED, &fs_info->flags); >>> spin_unlock(&fs_info->qgroup_lock); >>> - ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 1); >>> + ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 0); >>> if (!ret) { >>> qgroup_rescan_zero_tracking(fs_info); >>> btrfs_queue_work(fs_info->qgroup_rescan_workers, >>> >> >> This is what I think at first, but is it ok not holding fs_info->qgroup_ioctl_lock >> in brfs_qgroup_rescan() as you concerned in previous thread? > > I think it's OK, since we have larger mutex (subvol_sem) for > quota_enable/disable() so there will be no concurrency modifying flags. > And we're holding trans handler from btrfs_ioctl_quota_ctl(), > transaction won't be committed in btrfs_quota_enable(). Ok, but nikolay's patch in misc-next moves transaction commit in btrfs_quota_enable(): https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10508819/ ("btrfs: qgroups: Move transaction management inside btrfs_quota_enable/disable") This is related to https://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=152999289017582. However, it seems that other people does not see the problem, so I'm not sure how the above patch ends up... Thanks, Tomohiro Misono > > So I think it's OK. > > Thanks, > Qu > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time 2018-07-27 1:43 ` Misono Tomohiro @ 2018-07-27 6:09 ` Qu Wenruo 2018-07-27 6:47 ` Misono Tomohiro 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Qu Wenruo @ 2018-07-27 6:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Misono Tomohiro, linux-btrfs [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3477 bytes --] On 2018年07月27日 09:43, Misono Tomohiro wrote: > On 2018/07/27 10:19, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> >> >> On 2018年07月27日 09:10, Misono Tomohiro wrote: >>> On 2018/07/26 18:15, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>>> Between btrfs_quota_enable() finished and rescan kicked in, there is a >>>> small window that quota status has (ON | INCONSISTENT) bits set but >>>> without RESCAN bits set. >>>> >>>> And transaction is committed inside the window and then power loss >>>> happens, we will have a quota tree with all qgroup numbers set to 0, and >>>> not RESCAN bit set. >>>> >>>> At next mount time, qgroup rescan will not kick in due to the missing of >>>> RESCAN bit, user needs to kick in rescan manually. >>>> >>>> This patch will fix it by setting RESCAN bit at btrfs_quota_enable(), >>>> so even after power loss we will still kick in rescan automatically. >>>> >>>> Suggested-by: Misono Tomohiro <misono.tomohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> >>>> --- >>>> fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 5 +++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>>> index c25dc47210a3..13c1c7dd278d 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>>> @@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_generation(leaf, ptr, trans->transid); >>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_version(leaf, ptr, BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_VERSION); >>>> fs_info->qgroup_flags = BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_ON | >>>> - BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT; >>>> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT | >>>> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN; >>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_flags(leaf, ptr, fs_info->qgroup_flags); >>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_rescan(leaf, ptr, 0); >>>> >>>> @@ -987,7 +988,7 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>>> fs_info->quota_root = quota_root; >>>> set_bit(BTRFS_FS_QUOTA_ENABLED, &fs_info->flags); >>>> spin_unlock(&fs_info->qgroup_lock); >>>> - ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 1); >>>> + ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 0); >>>> if (!ret) { >>>> qgroup_rescan_zero_tracking(fs_info); >>>> btrfs_queue_work(fs_info->qgroup_rescan_workers, >>>> >>> >>> This is what I think at first, but is it ok not holding fs_info->qgroup_ioctl_lock >>> in brfs_qgroup_rescan() as you concerned in previous thread? >> >> I think it's OK, since we have larger mutex (subvol_sem) for >> quota_enable/disable() so there will be no concurrency modifying flags. >> And we're holding trans handler from btrfs_ioctl_quota_ctl(), >> transaction won't be committed in btrfs_quota_enable(). > > Ok, but nikolay's patch in misc-next moves transaction commit in btrfs_quota_enable(): > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10508819/ > ("btrfs: qgroups: Move transaction management inside btrfs_quota_enable/disable") Since qgroup_rescan_init() has nothing do to with transaction, it looks OK even with Nikolay's patch. > > This is related to https://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=152999289017582. > However, it seems that other people does not see the problem, > so I'm not sure how the above patch ends up... IIRC I also failed to reproduce it, thus can't provide much help for that thread. Thanks, Qu > > Thanks, > Tomohiro Misono > >> >> So I think it's OK. >> >> Thanks, >> Qu >> >> > [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time 2018-07-27 6:09 ` Qu Wenruo @ 2018-07-27 6:47 ` Misono Tomohiro 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Misono Tomohiro @ 2018-07-27 6:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs On 2018/07/27 15:09, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2018年07月27日 09:43, Misono Tomohiro wrote: >> On 2018/07/27 10:19, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2018年07月27日 09:10, Misono Tomohiro wrote: >>>> On 2018/07/26 18:15, Qu Wenruo wrote: >>>>> Between btrfs_quota_enable() finished and rescan kicked in, there is a >>>>> small window that quota status has (ON | INCONSISTENT) bits set but >>>>> without RESCAN bits set. >>>>> >>>>> And transaction is committed inside the window and then power loss >>>>> happens, we will have a quota tree with all qgroup numbers set to 0, and >>>>> not RESCAN bit set. >>>>> >>>>> At next mount time, qgroup rescan will not kick in due to the missing of >>>>> RESCAN bit, user needs to kick in rescan manually. >>>>> >>>>> This patch will fix it by setting RESCAN bit at btrfs_quota_enable(), >>>>> so even after power loss we will still kick in rescan automatically. >>>>> >>>>> Suggested-by: Misono Tomohiro <misono.tomohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 5 +++-- >>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>>>> index c25dc47210a3..13c1c7dd278d 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c >>>>> @@ -930,7 +930,8 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_generation(leaf, ptr, trans->transid); >>>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_version(leaf, ptr, BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_VERSION); >>>>> fs_info->qgroup_flags = BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_ON | >>>>> - BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT; >>>>> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_INCONSISTENT | >>>>> + BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN; >>>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_flags(leaf, ptr, fs_info->qgroup_flags); >>>>> btrfs_set_qgroup_status_rescan(leaf, ptr, 0); >>>>> >>>>> @@ -987,7 +988,7 @@ int btrfs_quota_enable(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >>>>> fs_info->quota_root = quota_root; >>>>> set_bit(BTRFS_FS_QUOTA_ENABLED, &fs_info->flags); >>>>> spin_unlock(&fs_info->qgroup_lock); >>>>> - ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 1); >>>>> + ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 0); >>>>> if (!ret) { >>>>> qgroup_rescan_zero_tracking(fs_info); >>>>> btrfs_queue_work(fs_info->qgroup_rescan_workers, >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is what I think at first, but is it ok not holding fs_info->qgroup_ioctl_lock >>>> in brfs_qgroup_rescan() as you concerned in previous thread? >>> >>> I think it's OK, since we have larger mutex (subvol_sem) for >>> quota_enable/disable() so there will be no concurrency modifying flags. >>> And we're holding trans handler from btrfs_ioctl_quota_ctl(), >>> transaction won't be committed in btrfs_quota_enable(). >> >> Ok, but nikolay's patch in misc-next moves transaction commit in btrfs_quota_enable(): >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10508819/ >> ("btrfs: qgroups: Move transaction management inside btrfs_quota_enable/disable") > > Since qgroup_rescan_init() has nothing do to with transaction, it looks > OK even with Nikolay's patch. > Understood. Thanks for your explanation. Misono >> >> This is related to https://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=152999289017582. >> However, it seems that other people does not see the problem, >> so I'm not sure how the above patch ends up... > > IIRC I also failed to reproduce it, thus can't provide much help for > that thread. > > Thanks, > Qu > > > >> >> Thanks, >> Tomohiro Misono >> >>> >>> So I think it's OK. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Qu >>> >>> >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-07-27 8:08 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2018-07-26 9:15 [PATCH] btrfs: qgroup: Init flags with RESCAN bit at quota enable time Qu Wenruo 2018-07-27 1:10 ` Misono Tomohiro 2018-07-27 1:19 ` Qu Wenruo 2018-07-27 1:43 ` Misono Tomohiro 2018-07-27 6:09 ` Qu Wenruo 2018-07-27 6:47 ` Misono Tomohiro
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox