From: Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@oracle.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix balance Oops
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 17:07:32 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A7BEED4.90405@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090807071952.GS12579@kernel.dk>
On 08/07/2009 03:19 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07 2009, Yan Zheng wrote:
>> On 08/07/2009 02:50 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 07 2009, Yan Zheng wrote:
>>>> invalidate_inode_pages2_range may return -EBUSY occasionally
>>>> which results Oops. This patch fixes the issue by moving
>>>> invalidate_inode_pages2_range into a loop and keeping calling
>>>> it until the return value is not -EBUSY.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@oracle.com>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> diff -urp 1/fs/btrfs/relocation.c 2/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
>>>> --- 1/fs/btrfs/relocation.c 2009-07-29 10:03:04.367858774 +0800
>>>> +++ 2/fs/btrfs/relocation.c 2009-08-07 13:26:43.882147138 +0800
>>>> @@ -2553,8 +2553,13 @@ int relocate_inode_pages(struct inode *i
>>>> last_index = (start + len - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
>>>>
>>>> /* make sure the dirty trick played by the caller work */
>>>> - ret = invalidate_inode_pages2_range(inode->i_mapping,
>>>> - first_index, last_index);
>>>> + while (1) {
>>>> + ret = invalidate_inode_pages2_range(inode->i_mapping,
>>>> + first_index, last_index);
>>>> + if (ret != -EBUSY)
>>>> + break;
>>>> + cond_resched();
>>>> + }
>>> If it returns EBUSY, would it not make more sense to call
>>> filemap_write_and_wait_range() instead of hammering on invalidate?
>>>
>> The pages to invalidate are not dirty, they are from page read-ahead.
>> Actually I have no idea how invalidate_inode_pages2_range can return
>> -EBUSY here. (the only user of the inode is the balancer, and it does
>> not hold references to the pages)
>
> Weird, I looked it up, and it already does a writeback wait. But I guess
> that's not your issue. Patch still looks like a hack though, it would be
> far better to figure out why it returns EBUSY and fix/wait appropriately
> for that to pass.
>
EBUSY is from the EXTENT_LOCK test in try_release_extent_state. The test
can be true is because some codes call lock_extent while corresponding
pages are not all locked. (one example is btrfs_finish_ordered_io)
Yan, Zheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-07 9:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-07 6:14 [PATCH] Fix balance Oops Yan Zheng
2009-08-07 6:50 ` Jens Axboe
2009-08-07 7:16 ` Yan Zheng
2009-08-07 7:19 ` Jens Axboe
2009-08-07 9:07 ` Yan Zheng [this message]
2009-08-07 12:51 ` Chris Mason
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=4A7BEED4.90405@oracle.com \
--to=zheng.yan@oracle.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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