* [PATCH v3 0/2] fix extents need to be restored when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed
@ 2023-02-07 7:09 zhanchengbin
2023-02-07 7:09 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix inode tree inconsistency caused by ENOMEM in ext4_split_extent_at zhanchengbin
2023-02-07 7:09 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed zhanchengbin
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-07 7:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tytso, jack; +Cc: linux-ext4, yi.zhang, linfeilong, liuzhiqiang26, zhanchengbin
Inside the ext4_ext_insert_extent function, every error returned will
not destroy the consistency of the tree. Even if it fails after changing
half of the tree, can also ensure that the tree is self-consistent, like
function ext4_ext_create_new_leaf.
After ext4_ext_insert_extent fails, update extent status tree depends on
the incoming split_flag. So restore the len of extent to be split when
ext4_ext_insert_extent return failed in ext4_split_extent_at.
Diff v2 Vs v1:
1) return directly after inserting successfully
2) restore the length of extent in memory after inserting unsuccessfully
Diff v3 Vs v2:
Sorry for not taking into account the successful extent insertion. and I
reanalyzed the ext4_ext_insert_extent function and modified the conditions
for restoring the length.
zhanchengbin (2):
ext4: fix inode tree inconsistency caused by ENOMEM in
ext4_split_extent_at
ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed
fs/ext4/extents.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix inode tree inconsistency caused by ENOMEM in ext4_split_extent_at 2023-02-07 7:09 [PATCH v3 0/2] fix extents need to be restored when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-07 7:09 ` zhanchengbin 2023-02-07 7:09 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed zhanchengbin 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-07 7:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: tytso, jack Cc: linux-ext4, yi.zhang, linfeilong, liuzhiqiang26, zhanchengbin, Jan Kara If ENOMEM fails when the extent is splitting, we need to restore the length of the split extent. In the call stack of the ext4_split_extent_at function, only in ext4_ext_create_new_leaf will it alloc memory and change the shape of the extent tree,even if an ENOMEM is returned at this time, the extent tree is still self-consistent, Just restore the split extent lens in the function ext4_split_extent_at. ext4_split_extent_at ext4_ext_insert_extent ext4_ext_create_new_leaf 1)ext4_ext_split ext4_find_extent 2)ext4_ext_grow_indepth ext4_find_extent Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> --- fs/ext4/extents.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c index 9de1c9d1a13d..3559ea6b0781 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c @@ -3251,7 +3251,7 @@ static int ext4_split_extent_at(handle_t *handle, ext4_ext_mark_unwritten(ex2); err = ext4_ext_insert_extent(handle, inode, ppath, &newex, flags); - if (err != -ENOSPC && err != -EDQUOT) + if (err != -ENOSPC && err != -EDQUOT && err != -ENOMEM) goto out; if (EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT & split_flag) { -- 2.31.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed 2023-02-07 7:09 [PATCH v3 0/2] fix extents need to be restored when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed zhanchengbin 2023-02-07 7:09 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix inode tree inconsistency caused by ENOMEM in ext4_split_extent_at zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-07 7:09 ` zhanchengbin 2023-02-07 14:23 ` Jan Kara 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-07 7:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: tytso, jack; +Cc: linux-ext4, yi.zhang, linfeilong, liuzhiqiang26, zhanchengbin Inside the ext4_ext_insert_extent function, every error returned will not destroy the consistency of the tree. Even if it fails after changing half of the tree, can also ensure that the tree is self-consistent, like function ext4_ext_create_new_leaf. After ext4_ext_insert_extent fails, update extent status tree depends on the incoming split_flag. So restore the len of extent to be split when ext4_ext_insert_extent return failed in ext4_split_extent_at. Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com> --- fs/ext4/extents.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c index 3559ea6b0781..b926fef73de4 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c @@ -935,6 +935,7 @@ ext4_find_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t block, bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, path[ppos].p_idx, --i, flags); if (IS_ERR(bh)) { + EXT4_ERROR_INODE(inode, "IO error reading extent block"); ret = PTR_ERR(bh); goto err; } @@ -3251,7 +3252,7 @@ static int ext4_split_extent_at(handle_t *handle, ext4_ext_mark_unwritten(ex2); err = ext4_ext_insert_extent(handle, inode, ppath, &newex, flags); - if (err != -ENOSPC && err != -EDQUOT && err != -ENOMEM) + if (!err) goto out; if (EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT & split_flag) { -- 2.31.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed 2023-02-07 7:09 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-07 14:23 ` Jan Kara 2023-02-08 7:10 ` zhanchengbin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Jan Kara @ 2023-02-07 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zhanchengbin; +Cc: tytso, jack, linux-ext4, yi.zhang, linfeilong, liuzhiqiang26 On Tue 07-02-23 15:09:31, zhanchengbin wrote: > Inside the ext4_ext_insert_extent function, every error returned will > not destroy the consistency of the tree. Even if it fails after changing > half of the tree, can also ensure that the tree is self-consistent, like > function ext4_ext_create_new_leaf. Hum, but e.g. if ext4_ext_correct_indexes() fails, we *will* end up with corrupted extent tree pretty much without a chance for recovery, won't we? Honza > After ext4_ext_insert_extent fails, update extent status tree depends on > the incoming split_flag. So restore the len of extent to be split when > ext4_ext_insert_extent return failed in ext4_split_extent_at. > > Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com> > --- > fs/ext4/extents.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c > index 3559ea6b0781..b926fef73de4 100644 > --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c > +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c > @@ -935,6 +935,7 @@ ext4_find_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t block, > > bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, path[ppos].p_idx, --i, flags); > if (IS_ERR(bh)) { > + EXT4_ERROR_INODE(inode, "IO error reading extent block"); > ret = PTR_ERR(bh); > goto err; > } > @@ -3251,7 +3252,7 @@ static int ext4_split_extent_at(handle_t *handle, > ext4_ext_mark_unwritten(ex2); > > err = ext4_ext_insert_extent(handle, inode, ppath, &newex, flags); > - if (err != -ENOSPC && err != -EDQUOT && err != -ENOMEM) > + if (!err) > goto out; > > if (EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT & split_flag) { > -- > 2.31.1 > -- Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> SUSE Labs, CR ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed 2023-02-07 14:23 ` Jan Kara @ 2023-02-08 7:10 ` zhanchengbin 2023-02-08 13:12 ` Jan Kara 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-08 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Kara; +Cc: tytso, jack, linux-ext4, yi.zhang, linfeilong, liuzhiqiang26 Thanks for your comments. I've analyzed this situation, If a failure occurs at a certain layer, the start of the upper and lower logical blocks is different, this's same as ext4_ext_rm_idx. If this happens data is not flushed to disks so data on disks is consistent, but data on the memory is inconsistent (have journal). In my opinion, we just need to ensure that we don't use the wrong data and flush to disk. Look code we can know if ext4_ext_get_access and ext4_ext_dirty faild, the verified flag of bh will be cleared, if read this bad inode again, read_extent_tree_block will check verified flag and goto __ext4_ext_check, finally, return error in the ext4_valid_extent_entries function if the logical block start is incorrect, So does not change the consistency of data on the disk. (Emmmmmm, I misunderstand the judgment in ext4_valid_extent_entries. Later, I will clear the verified flag from the modified bh when ext4_valid_extent_entries fails.) If no journal, the data on the disk is inconsistent, too. Can use fsck to fix it. What do you think? - bin. On 2023/2/7 22:23, Jan Kara wrote: > On Tue 07-02-23 15:09:31, zhanchengbin wrote: >> Inside the ext4_ext_insert_extent function, every error returned will >> not destroy the consistency of the tree. Even if it fails after changing >> half of the tree, can also ensure that the tree is self-consistent, like >> function ext4_ext_create_new_leaf. > > Hum, but e.g. if ext4_ext_correct_indexes() fails, we *will* end up with > corrupted extent tree pretty much without a chance for recovery, won't we? > > Honza > >> After ext4_ext_insert_extent fails, update extent status tree depends on >> the incoming split_flag. So restore the len of extent to be split when >> ext4_ext_insert_extent return failed in ext4_split_extent_at. >> >> Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> >> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com> >> --- >> fs/ext4/extents.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c >> index 3559ea6b0781..b926fef73de4 100644 >> --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c >> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c >> @@ -935,6 +935,7 @@ ext4_find_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t block, >> >> bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, path[ppos].p_idx, --i, flags); >> if (IS_ERR(bh)) { >> + EXT4_ERROR_INODE(inode, "IO error reading extent block"); >> ret = PTR_ERR(bh); >> goto err; >> } >> @@ -3251,7 +3252,7 @@ static int ext4_split_extent_at(handle_t *handle, >> ext4_ext_mark_unwritten(ex2); >> >> err = ext4_ext_insert_extent(handle, inode, ppath, &newex, flags); >> - if (err != -ENOSPC && err != -EDQUOT && err != -ENOMEM) >> + if (!err) >> goto out; >> >> if (EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT & split_flag) { >> -- >> 2.31.1 >> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed 2023-02-08 7:10 ` zhanchengbin @ 2023-02-08 13:12 ` Jan Kara 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Jan Kara @ 2023-02-08 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zhanchengbin Cc: Jan Kara, tytso, jack, linux-ext4, yi.zhang, linfeilong, liuzhiqiang26 On Wed 08-02-23 15:10:35, zhanchengbin wrote: > Thanks for your comments. > I've analyzed this situation, If a failure occurs at a certain layer, the > start of the upper and lower logical blocks is different, this's same as > ext4_ext_rm_idx. > If this happens data is not flushed to disks so data on disks is > consistent, but data on the memory is inconsistent (have journal). In my > opinion, we just need to ensure that we don't use the wrong data and flush > to disk. Look code we can know if ext4_ext_get_access and ext4_ext_dirty > faild, the verified flag of bh will be cleared, if read this bad inode > again, read_extent_tree_block will check verified flag and goto > __ext4_ext_check, finally, return error in the ext4_valid_extent_entries > function if the logical block start is incorrect, So does not change the > consistency of data on the disk. (Emmmmmm, I misunderstand the judgment in > ext4_valid_extent_entries. Later, I will clear the verified flag from the > modified bh when ext4_valid_extent_entries fails.) > If no journal, the data on the disk is inconsistent, too. Can use fsck to > fix it. > What do you think? So I agree that as soon as we abort the journal, modified data cannot get to the disk and so we will not be writing inconsistent extent tree to the disk. But we could still succeed in submitting requests to zero-out parts of existing extent and that may corrupt the filesystem if the journal is already aborted at that moment and gets replayed to some previous, not quite known state. So in that case is there any point in trying to fixup anything? The only occasions where it makes sense trying to keep extent tree consistent is during some non-catastrophical errors - currently we have ENOSPC, EDQUOT, ENOMEM - which make sense because from these we should better recover without corrupting the filesystem. But I don't really see any point in trying to fixup the "catastrophical" errors like EIO or EFSCORRUPTED, it can do only harm. Honza > On 2023/2/7 22:23, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Tue 07-02-23 15:09:31, zhanchengbin wrote: > > > Inside the ext4_ext_insert_extent function, every error returned will > > > not destroy the consistency of the tree. Even if it fails after changing > > > half of the tree, can also ensure that the tree is self-consistent, like > > > function ext4_ext_create_new_leaf. > > > > Hum, but e.g. if ext4_ext_correct_indexes() fails, we *will* end up with > > corrupted extent tree pretty much without a chance for recovery, won't we? > > > > Honza > > > > > After ext4_ext_insert_extent fails, update extent status tree depends on > > > the incoming split_flag. So restore the len of extent to be split when > > > ext4_ext_insert_extent return failed in ext4_split_extent_at. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com> > > > --- > > > fs/ext4/extents.c | 3 ++- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c > > > index 3559ea6b0781..b926fef73de4 100644 > > > --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c > > > +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c > > > @@ -935,6 +935,7 @@ ext4_find_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t block, > > > bh = read_extent_tree_block(inode, path[ppos].p_idx, --i, flags); > > > if (IS_ERR(bh)) { > > > + EXT4_ERROR_INODE(inode, "IO error reading extent block"); > > > ret = PTR_ERR(bh); > > > goto err; > > > } > > > @@ -3251,7 +3252,7 @@ static int ext4_split_extent_at(handle_t *handle, > > > ext4_ext_mark_unwritten(ex2); > > > err = ext4_ext_insert_extent(handle, inode, ppath, &newex, flags); > > > - if (err != -ENOSPC && err != -EDQUOT && err != -ENOMEM) > > > + if (!err) > > > goto out; > > > if (EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT & split_flag) { > > > -- > > > 2.31.1 > > > -- Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> SUSE Labs, CR ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-02-08 13:12 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2023-02-07 7:09 [PATCH v3 0/2] fix extents need to be restored when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed zhanchengbin 2023-02-07 7:09 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix inode tree inconsistency caused by ENOMEM in ext4_split_extent_at zhanchengbin 2023-02-07 7:09 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: restore len when ext4_ext_insert_extent failed zhanchengbin 2023-02-07 14:23 ` Jan Kara 2023-02-08 7:10 ` zhanchengbin 2023-02-08 13:12 ` Jan Kara
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox