From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Masayoshi MIZUMA <m.mizuma@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
sandeen@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Re: [BUG] ext4: cannot unfreeze a filesystem due to a deadlock
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:51:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110418105105.GB5557@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DABFEBD.7030102@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Mon 18-04-11 18:05:01, Toshiyuki Okajima wrote:
> >On Fri 15-04-11 22:39:07, Toshiyuki Okajima wrote:
> >>> For ext3 or ext4 without delayed allocation we block inside writepage()
> >>>function. But as I wrote to Dave Chinner, ->page_mkwrite() should probably
> >>>get modified to block while minor-faulting the page on frozen fs because
> >>>when blocks are already allocated we may skip starting a transaction and so
> >>>we could possibly modify the filesystem.
> >>OK. I think ->page_mkwrite() should also block writing the minor-faulting pages.
> >>
> >>(minor-pagefault)
> >>-> do_wp_page()
> >> -> page_mkwrite(= ext4_mkwrite())
> >> => BLOCK!
> >>
> >>(major-pagefault)
> >>-> do_liner_fault()
> >> -> page_mkwrite(= ext4_mkwrite())
> >> => BLOCK!
> >>
> >>>
> >>>>>>Mizuma-san's reproducer also writes the data which maps to the file (mmap).
> >>>>>>The original problem happens after the fsfreeze operation is done.
> >>>>>>I understand the normal write operation (not mmap) can be blocked while
> >>>>>>fsfreezing. So, I guess we don't always block all the write operation
> >>>>>>while fsfreezing.
> >>>>> Technically speaking, we block all the transaction starts which means we
> >>>>>end up blocking all the writes from going to disk. But that does not mean
> >>>>>we block all the writes from going to in-memory cache - as you properly
> >>>>>note the mmap case is one of such exceptions.
> >>>>Hm, I also think we can allow the writes to in-memory cache but we can't allow
> >>>>the writes to disk while fsfreezing. I am considering that mmap path can
> >>>>write to disk while fsfreezing because this deadlock problem happens after
> >>>>fsfreeze operation is done...
> >>> I'm sorry I don't understand now - are you speaking about the case above
> >>>when writepage() does not wait for filesystem being frozen or something
> >>>else?
> >>Sorry, I didn't understand around the page fault path.
> >>So, I had read the kernel source code around it, then I maybe understand...
> >>
> >>I worry whether we can update the file data in mmap case while fsfreezing.
> >>Of course, I understand that we can write to in-memory cache, and it is not a
> >>problem. However, if we can write to disk while fsfreezing, it is a problem.
> >>So, I summarize the cases whether we can write to disk or not.
> >>
> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>Cases (Whether we can write the data mmapped to the file on the disk
> >>while fsfreezing)
> >>
> >>[1] One of the page which has been mmapped is not bound. And
> >> the page is not allocated yet. (major fault?)
> >>
> >> (1) user dirtys a page
> >> (2) a page fault occurs (do_page_fault)
> >> (3) __do_falut is called.
> >> (4) ext4_page_mkwrite is called
> >> (5) ext4_write_begin is called
> >> (6) ext4_journal_start_sb => We can STOP!
> >>
> >>[2] One of the page which has been mmapped is not bound. But
> >> the page is already allocated, and the buffer_heads of the page
> >> are not mapped (BH_Mapped). (minor fault?)
> >>
> >> (1) user dirtys a page
> >> (2) a page fault occurs (do_page_fault)
> >> (3) do_wp_page is called.
> >> (4) ext4_page_mkwrite is called
> >> (5) ext4_write_begin is called
> >> (6) ext4_journal_start_sb => We can STOP!
> >>
> >>[3] One of the page which has been mmapped is not bound. But
> >> the page is already allocated, and the buffer_heads of the page
> >> are mapped (BH_Mapped). (minor fault?)
> >>
> >> (1) user dirtys a page
> >> (2) a page fault occurs (do_page_fault)
> >> (3) do_wp_page is called.
> >> (4) ext4_page_mkwrite is called
> >> * Cannot block the dirty page to be written because all bh is mapped.
> >> (5) user munmaps the page (munmap)
> >> (6) zap_pte_range dirtys the page (struct page) which is pte_dirtyed.
> >> (7) writeback thread writes the page (struct page) to disk
> >> => We cannot STOP!
> >>
> >>[4] One of the page which has been mmapped is bound. And
> >> the page is already allocated.
> >>
> >> (1) user dirtys a page
> >> ( ) no page fault occurs
> >> (2) user munmaps the page (munmap)
> >> (3) zap_pte_range dirtys the page (struct page) which is pte_dirtyed.
> >> (4) writeback thread writes the page (struct page) to disk
> >> => We cannot STOP!
> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>So, we can block the cases [1], [2].
> >>But I think we cannot block the cases [3], [4] now.
> >>If fixing the page_mkwrite, we can also block the case [3].
> >>But the case [4] is not blocked because no page fault occurs
> >>when we dirty the mmapped page.
> >>
> >>Therefore, to repair this problem, we need to fix the cases [3], [4].
> >>I think we must modify the writeback thread to fix the case [4].
> > The trick here is that when we write a page to disk, we write-protect
> >the page (you seem to call this that "the page is bound", I'm not sure why).
> Hm, I want to understand how to write-protect the page under fsfreezing.
Look at what page_mkclean() called from clear_page_dirty_for_io() does...
> But, anyway, I understand we don't need to consider the case [4].
Yes.
> >So we are guaranteed to receive a minor fault (case [3]) if user tries to
> >modify a page after we finish writeback while freezing the filesystem.
> >So principially all we need to do is just wait in ext4_page_mkwrite().
> OK. I understand.
> Are there any concrete ideas to fix this?
> For ext4, we can rescue from the case [3] by modifying ext4_page_mkwrite().
Yes.
> But for ext3 or other FSs, we must implement ->page_mkwrite() to prevent it?
Sadly I don't see a simple way to fix this issue for all filesystems at
once. Implementing proper wait in block_page_mkwrite() should fix the issue
for xfs. Other filesystems like GFS2 or Btrfs will have to be fixed
separately as ext4. For ext3, we'd have to add ->page_mkwrite() support. I
have patches for this already for some time but I have to get to properly
testing them in more exotic conditions like 64k pages...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-18 10:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 120+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-07 11:53 [BUG] ext4: cannot unfreeze a filesystem due to a deadlock Masayoshi MIZUMA
2011-02-15 16:06 ` Jan Kara
2011-02-15 17:03 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-02-15 17:29 ` Jan Kara
2011-02-15 18:04 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-02-15 19:11 ` Jan Kara
2011-02-15 23:17 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-02-16 14:56 ` Jan Kara
2011-02-17 3:50 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-02-17 5:13 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-02-17 10:41 ` Jan Kara
2011-02-17 10:45 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-28 8:06 ` [RFC][PATCH] " Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-03-30 14:12 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-31 8:37 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-03-31 8:48 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-03-31 14:04 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-03-31 14:36 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-03-31 15:25 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-03-31 16:28 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-31 12:03 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-05 10:25 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-05 22:54 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-06 5:09 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-06 5:57 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-06 7:40 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-06 17:46 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-15 13:39 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-15 17:13 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-15 17:17 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-15 17:37 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-18 9:05 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-18 10:51 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2011-04-19 9:43 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-22 6:58 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-04-22 21:26 ` Peter M. Petrakis
2011-04-22 21:40 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-22 22:57 ` Peter M. Petrakis
2011-04-22 22:10 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-25 6:28 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-05-03 8:06 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 11:01 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 13:08 ` (unknown), Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 13:46 ` your mail Jan Kara
2011-05-03 13:56 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 15:26 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 15:36 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-03 15:43 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-04 19:24 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-06 15:20 ` [RFC][PATCH] Do not accept a new handle when the F.S is frozen Surbhi Palande
2011-05-06 15:20 ` [PATCH] Adding support to freeze and unfreeze a journal Surbhi Palande
2011-05-06 20:56 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-05-07 20:04 ` [PATCH v2] " Surbhi Palande
2011-05-08 8:24 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-05-09 9:04 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-09 9:24 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-09 9:53 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-09 13:49 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-09 14:51 ` [PATCH v3] " Surbhi Palande
2011-05-09 15:08 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-10 15:07 ` [PATCH] " Surbhi Palande
2011-05-10 21:07 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-05-11 7:46 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-09 15:23 ` [PATCH v3] " Eric Sandeen
2011-05-11 7:06 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-11 7:10 ` [PATCH] Attempt to sync the fsstress writes to a frozen F.S Surbhi Palande
2011-05-12 14:22 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-24 21:42 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-05-25 12:00 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-25 12:12 ` Theodore Tso
2011-05-27 16:28 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-11 9:05 ` [PATCH v3] Adding support to freeze and unfreeze a journal Andreas Dilger
2011-05-12 9:40 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 13:08 ` [PATCH] Prevent dirtying a page when ext4 F.S is frozen Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 15:19 ` [RFC][PATCH] Re: [BUG] ext4: cannot unfreeze a filesystem due to a deadlock Jan Kara
2011-05-04 12:09 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-04 19:19 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-04 21:34 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-04 22:48 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-05 6:06 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-05 11:18 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-05 14:01 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-03-31 23:40 ` Dave Chinner
2011-03-31 23:53 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-01 14:08 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-06 5:40 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-06 6:18 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-06 11:21 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-06 13:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-06 22:59 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-06 17:40 ` Jan Kara
2011-04-06 22:54 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-08 21:33 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-02 9:07 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-02 10:56 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-02 11:27 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-02 12:06 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-02 12:20 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-02 12:30 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-02 13:16 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-02 13:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-02 14:20 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-02 14:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-02 16:23 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-02 16:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-02 13:22 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-02 13:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-02 13:27 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-02 14:26 ` Jan Kara
2011-05-02 14:04 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-03 7:27 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-03 20:14 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-04 8:26 ` Surbhi Palande
2011-05-04 14:30 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-02 14:01 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-05 10:44 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2011-12-09 1:56 ` Masayoshi MIZUMA
2011-12-15 12:41 ` Masayoshi MIZUMA
2013-11-29 4:58 ` Yongqiang Yang
2013-11-29 8:00 ` Jan Kara
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=20110418105105.GB5557@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.mizuma@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com \
--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).