From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, 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 21:15:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130802191537.GA25558@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130802152624.GA1121@redhat.com>
On Fri 02-08-13 11:26:24, Dave Jones wrote:
> 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 ?
Likely, I saw fsstress failures with it. But fsx would likely fail as
well - the writing of tail page was hosed.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-02 19:15 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
2013-08-02 19:15 ` Jan Kara [this message]
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=20130802191537.GA25558@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.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).