linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Ted Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Make ext4_writepages() resilient to i_size changes
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 11:26:24 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130802152624.GA1121@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130802142324.GA20484@quack.suse.cz>

On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 04:23:24PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
 > On Thu 01-08-13 00:42:12, Jan Kara wrote:
 > > Inode size can arbitrarily change while writeback is in progress. This
 > > can have various strange effects when we use one value of i_size for one
 > > decision during writeback and another value of i_size for a different
 > > decision during writeback. In particular a check for lblk < blocks in
 > > mpage_map_and_submit_buffers() causes problems when i_size is reduced
 > > while writeback is running because we can end up not using all blocks
 > > we've allocated. Thus these blocks are leaked and also delalloc
 > > accounting gets wrong manifesting as a warning like:
 > > 
 > > ext4_da_release_space:1333: ext4_da_release_space: ino 12, to_free 1
 > > with only 0 reserved data blocks
 > > 
 > > The problem can happen only when blocksize < pagesize because the check
 > > for size is performed only after the first iteration of the mapping
 > > loop.
 > > 
 > > Fix the problem by removing the size check from the mapping loop. We
 > > have an extent allocated so we have to use it all before checking for
 > > i_size. We may call add_page_bufs_to_extent() unnecessarily but that
 > > function won't do anything if passed block number is beyond file size.
 > > 
 > > Also to avoid future surprises like this sample inode size when
 > > starting writeback in ext4_writepages() and then use this sampled size
 > > throughout the writeback call stack.
 >   Ted, please disregard this patch. It is buggy. I'll send a better fix
 > soon.
 
I was about to post that I was seeing fsx failures on 1k filesystems
on a kernel with this patch.

Is that the same thing you're seeing ?

	Dave


  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-02 15:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-31 22:42 [PATCH] ext4: Make ext4_writepages() resilient to i_size changes Jan Kara
2013-08-02 14:23 ` Jan Kara
2013-08-02 15:26   ` Dave Jones [this message]
2013-08-02 19:15     ` 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=20130802152624.GA1121@redhat.com \
    --to=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --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).