From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@redhat.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>, Mingming Cao <cmm@us.ibm.com>,
"linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: jbd2_handle and i_data_sem circular locking dependency detected
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 21:57:03 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080205162703.GD7038@skywalker> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080205134228.GA25464@duck.suse.cz>
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 02:42:28PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 05-02-08 17:53:42, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> >
> > How about the patch below. I did the below testing
> > a) migrate a file
> > b) run fs_inode fsstres fsx_linux.
> >
> > The intention was to find out whether the new locking is breaking any of
> > the other expected hierarchy. It seems to fine. I didn't get any lockdep
> > warning.
> I think there's a problem in the patch. I don't think you can call
> free_ind_block() while readers are accessing the file. That could make them
> think the file contains holes when they aren't there (or even worse read
> freed blocks or so). So you need to lock i_data_sem before this call (that
> means you have to move journal_extend() as well). Actually, I don't quite
> get why ext4_journal_extend() is called in that function. You can just
> count with the 1 credit in ext4_ext_migrate() when you call
> ext4_journal_extend() before calling ext4_ext_swap_inode_data(). Oh,
> probably because free_ind_block() could extend the transaction (which they
> don't do now as far as I can see).
ext4_journal_extend is called to extend the journal by one credit to
take care of writing the block containing inode. I moved the journal
extend before taking i_data_sem lock.
diff --git a/fs/ext4/migrate.c b/fs/ext4/migrate.c
index f97c993..dc6617a 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/migrate.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/migrate.c
@@ -302,10 +302,6 @@ static int ext4_ext_swap_inode_data(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
struct ext4_inode_info *ei = EXT4_I(inode);
struct ext4_inode_info *tmp_ei = EXT4_I(tmp_inode);
- retval = free_ind_block(handle, inode);
- if (retval)
- goto err_out;
-
/*
* One credit accounted for writing the
* i_data field of the original inode
@@ -318,6 +314,10 @@ static int ext4_ext_swap_inode_data(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
}
down_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem);
+ retval = free_ind_block(handle, inode);
+ if (retval)
+ goto err_out;
+
/*
* We have the extent map build with the tmp inode.
* Now copy the i_data across
The above change also make sure we don't fail after we free the indirect
blocks.
> BTW: That freeing code should really take into account that it can modify
> bitmaps in different block groups. It's even not that hard to do. Just
> before each ext4_free_blocks() in free_ind_block() you check whether you
> have still enough credits in the handle (use h_buffer_credits) and if not,
> extend it by some amount.
I have a FIXME at migrate.c:524 documenting exactly that. The
difficult question was by how much we should extent the journal. ? But
in reality we might have accumulated enough journal credits, I never
really ran across a case where we are running out of the journal credit.
> Maybe you could do some test like writing a big file with some data and then
> while migration is running read it in a loop and compare that MD5SUM is the
> same all the time. Also run some memory-pressure during this test so that
> data blocks aren't cached for the whole time of the test... That should
> reasonably stress the migration code.
I have tested migrate by booting with mem= and doing parallel
read/write and migrate. I didn't do the MDSUM compare. Will do that this
time.
Thanks for all the help with review.
-aneesh
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-05 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-04 10:12 jbd2_handle and i_data_sem circular locking dependency detected Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-02-04 15:23 ` Josef Bacik
2008-02-04 15:37 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-02-04 16:31 ` Jan Kara
2008-02-04 17:12 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-02-04 17:40 ` Jan Kara
2008-02-05 12:23 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-02-05 13:42 ` Jan Kara
2008-02-05 16:27 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2008-02-05 16:34 ` Jan Kara
2008-02-05 20:06 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-03-05 20:12 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-03-10 9:37 ` Jan Kara
2008-03-10 14:24 ` Jan Kara
2008-03-11 5:45 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
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=20080205162703.GD7038@skywalker \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=adilger@sun.com \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jbacik@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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).