From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
To: Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
Cc: linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@redhat.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
"linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 20:13:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cd11bff9-46cc-4148-9dcf-4087e1621985@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <jpgro32y5r3mpyh24hoqnwkbcg67twbmcxeicoa5qt723u7ehk@4imddarhtt74>
On 2024/3/19 19:13, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2024 / 10:22, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2024/3/18 13:47, Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
>>> I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a
>>> look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not
>>> in the commit diff.
>>>
>>> I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices,
>>> and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device in the
>>> direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and f2fs_map_blocks_cached()
>>> modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It
>>> becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However,
>>> f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address of the
>>> whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against
>>> NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid
>>> iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length.
>>>
>>> This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps.
>>>
>>> - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size each:
>>> nullb0 and nullb1.
>>> # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1
>>> # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}"
>>> # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192
>>> # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct
>>>
>>> I created a fix candidate patch [1]. It modifies f2fs_iomap_begin() to handle
>>> map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each device start, not the
>>> address of whole f2fs. I confirmed it avoids the WARN.
>>>
>>> But I'm not so sure if the fix is good enough. map->m_pblk has dual meanings.
>>> Sometimes it holds the physical block address of each device, and sometimes
>>> the address of the whole f2fs. I'm not sure what is the condition for
>>> map->m_pblk to have which meaning. I guess F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO flag is the
>>> condition, but f2fs_map_blocks_cached() does not ensure it.
>>>
>>> Also, I noticed that map->m_pblk is referred to in other functions below, and
>>> not sure if they need the similar change as I did for f2fs_iomap_begin().
>>>
>>> f2fs_fiemap()
>>> f2fs_read_single_page()
>>> f2fs_bmap()
>>> check_swap_activate()
>>>
>>> I would like to hear advices from f2fs experts for the fix.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> index 26e317696b33..5232223a69e5 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> @@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode *inode,
>>> int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
>>> struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = &sbi->devs[bidx];
>>> + map->m_multidev_dio = true;
>>> map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
>>> map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
>>> map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - map->m_pblk);
>>> @@ -4211,9 +4212,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
>>> unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
>>> struct iomap *srcmap)
>>> {
>>> + struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
>>> struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
>>> pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
>>> - int err;
>>> + block_t pblk;
>>> + int err, i;
>>> map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);
>>> map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk + 1;
>>> @@ -4239,12 +4242,17 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
>>> * We should never see delalloc or compressed extents here based on
>>> * prior flushing and checks.
>>> */
>>> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == NEW_ADDR))
>>> + pblk = map.m_pblk;
>>> + if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED)
>>> + for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
>>> + if (FDEV(i).bdev == map.m_bdev)
>>> + pblk += FDEV(i).start_blk;
>>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == NEW_ADDR))
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
>>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> Shoudn't we check NEW_ADDR and COMPRESS_ADDR before multiple-device
>> block address conversion?
>
> As far as I understand, NEW_ADDR and COMPRESS_ADDR in map.m_pblk can be
> target of "map->m_pblk -= FDEV(bidx).start_blk;" in f2fs_map_blocks(),
> so I guessed that the address conversion should come first.
>
>>
>>> - if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
>>> + if (pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
>>
>> How to distinguish NULL_ADDR and valid blkaddr 0? I guess it should
>> check F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag first?
>
> I guessed that physical block address for the whole f2fs (pblk) can not be 0, so
> the NULL_ADDR can have zero value. As for the physical block address of each
> device (map->m_pblk) can be 0. But this is still my *guess*, and I'm not sure.
>
>
> The comments from you and Daeho made me rethink. It looks problematic for me
> that map->m_pblk has two meanings as I had described: "1) physical block address
> from each device start", and "2) physical block address of whole f2fs". So how
> about to make it have only one meaning "2) physical block address address of
> whole f2fs"? I created another patch below [2]. It removes the
>
> map->m_pblk -= FDEV(bidx).start_blk;
>
> lines in f2fs_map_blocks_cached() and f2fs_map_blocks() so that map->m_pblk do
> not have the meaning 1). Instead, the subtraction is done in f2fs_iomap_begin().
> I confirmed that this patch also avoids the WARN. I can have more confidence in
> this patch, and I hope it is easier to review.
>
> P.S. If anyone has better solution idea, feel free to provide patches. I'm
> willing to test them :)
>
>
> [2]
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> index 26e317696b33..7404b4fbcba3 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> @@ -1569,8 +1569,8 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode *inode,
> int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
> struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = &sbi->devs[bidx];
>
> + map->m_multidev_dio = true;
> map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
> - map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
> map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - map->m_pblk);
> } else {
> map->m_bdev = inode->i_sb->s_bdev;
> @@ -1793,11 +1793,8 @@ int f2fs_map_blocks(struct inode *inode, struct f2fs_map_blocks *map, int flag)
>
> if (map->m_multidev_dio) {
> block_t blk_addr = map->m_pblk;
> -
> bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
> -
> map->m_bdev = FDEV(bidx).bdev;
> - map->m_pblk -= FDEV(bidx).start_blk;
>
> if (map->m_may_create)
> f2fs_update_device_state(sbi, inode->i_ino,
> @@ -4211,9 +4208,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
> struct iomap *srcmap)
> {
> + struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
> struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
> pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
> - int err;
> + block_t pblk;
> + int err, bidx;
>
> map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);
> map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk + 1;
> @@ -4249,7 +4248,12 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
> iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
> iomap->bdev = map.m_bdev;
> - iomap->addr = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_pblk);
> + pblk = map.m_pblk;
> + if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
> + bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map.m_pblk);
> + pblk -= FDEV(bidx).start_blk;
> + }
> + iomap->addr = blks_to_bytes(inode, pblk);
> } else {
> if (flags & IOMAP_WRITE)
> return -ENOTBLK;
Hi Shinichiro,
Can you please check below diff? IIUC, for the case: f2fs_map_blocks()
returns zero blkaddr in non-primary device, which is a verified valid
block address, we'd better to check m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED instead
of map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR to decide whether tagging IOMAP_MAPPED flag
or not.
---
fs/f2fs/data.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 6f66e3e4221a..41a56d4298c8 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -4203,7 +4203,7 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;
- if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
+ if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-24 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-18 16:58 [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010 Yi Zhang
2024-02-28 11:08 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-02-28 12:08 ` Yi Zhang
[not found] ` <CAHj4cs_eOSafp0=cbwjNPR6X2342GF_cnUTcXf6RjrMnoOHSmQ@mail.gmail.com>
2024-03-01 16:33 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-03-12 2:52 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
[not found] ` <CAHj4cs-DC7QQH1W3KSzXS8ERMPW-6XQ9-w_Mzr1zEGF7ZZ=K3w@mail.gmail.com>
2024-03-12 9:34 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-03-18 5:47 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-03-18 21:12 ` Daeho Jeong
2024-03-19 10:56 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-03-19 2:22 ` Chao Yu
2024-03-19 11:13 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-03-24 12:13 ` Chao Yu [this message]
2024-03-25 2:14 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-03-25 3:06 ` Chao Yu
2024-03-25 6:56 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-03-26 3:30 ` Chao Yu
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=cd11bff9-46cc-4148-9dcf-4087e1621985@kernel.org \
--to=chao@kernel.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@redhat.com \
/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