From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
hch@infradead.org, sandeen@sandeen.net, song@kernel.org,
rafael@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jack@suse.cz, jikos@kernel.org,
bvanassche@acm.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, mchehab@kernel.org,
keescook@chromium.org, p.raghav@samsung.com,
da.gomez@samsung.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel@tuxforce.de, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] fs: add automatic kernel fs freeze / thaw and remove kthread freezing
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 08:17:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230516151718.GP858815@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230509012013.GD2651828@dread.disaster.area>
On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 11:20:13AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Sun, May 07, 2023 at 06:17:17PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > Add support to automatically handle freezing and thawing filesystems
> > during the kernel's suspend/resume cycle.
> >
> > This is needed so that we properly really stop IO in flight without
> > races after userspace has been frozen. Without this we rely on
> > kthread freezing and its semantics are loose and error prone.
> > For instance, even though a kthread may use try_to_freeze() and end
> > up being frozen we have no way of being sure that everything that
> > has been spawned asynchronously from it (such as timers) have also
> > been stopped as well.
> >
> > A long term advantage of also adding filesystem freeze / thawing
> > supporting during suspend / hibernation is that long term we may
> > be able to eventually drop the kernel's thread freezing completely
> > as it was originally added to stop disk IO in flight as we hibernate
> > or suspend.
> >
> > This does not remove the superfluous freezer calls on all filesystems.
> > Each filesystem must remove all the kthread freezer stuff and peg
> > the fs_type flags as supporting auto-freezing with the FS_AUTOFREEZE
> > flag.
> >
> > Subsequent patches remove the kthread freezer usage from each
> > filesystem, one at a time to make all this work bisectable.
> > Once all filesystems remove the usage of the kthread freezer we
> > can remove the FS_AUTOFREEZE flag.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> > Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > fs/super.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/fs.h | 14 ++++++++++++
> > kernel/power/process.c | 15 ++++++++++++-
> > 3 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> .....
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/power/process.c b/kernel/power/process.c
> > index cae81a87cc91..7ca7688f0b5d 100644
> > --- a/kernel/power/process.c
> > +++ b/kernel/power/process.c
> > @@ -140,6 +140,16 @@ int freeze_processes(void)
> >
> > BUG_ON(in_atomic());
> >
> > + pr_info("Freezing filesystems ... ");
> > + error = iterate_supers_reverse_excl(fs_suspend_freeze_sb, NULL);
> > + if (error) {
> > + pr_cont("failed\n");
> > + iterate_supers_excl(fs_suspend_thaw_sb, NULL);
> > + thaw_processes();
> > + return error;
>
> That looks wrong. i.e. if the sb iteration fails to freeze a
> filesystem (for whatever reason) then every userspace frozen
> filesystem will be thawed by this call, right? i.e. it will thaw
> more than just the filesystems frozen by the suspend freeze
> iteration before it failed.
>
> Don't we only want to thaw the superblocks we froze before the
> failure occurred? i.e. the "undo" iteration needs to start from the
> last superblock we successfully froze and then only walk to the tail
> of the list we started from?
I think fs_suspend_thaw_sb calls thaw_super(..., false), which will not
undo a userspace freeze. So strictly speaking the answer to your
question is (AFAICT) "no it won't"
That said, I read this and also had a raised-eyebrow moment -- we
shouldn't (un?)touch superblocks that fs_suspend_freeze_sb didn't touch
in the first place.
I wonder if we should be using that NULL parameter to keep track of the
last super that fs_suspend_freeze_sb didn't fail on?
--D
> > + }
> > + pr_cont("done.\n");
> > +
> > /*
> > * Now that the whole userspace is frozen we need to disable
> > * the OOM killer to disallow any further interference with
> > @@ -149,8 +159,10 @@ int freeze_processes(void)
> > if (!error && !oom_killer_disable(msecs_to_jiffies(freeze_timeout_msecs)))
> > error = -EBUSY;
> >
> > - if (error)
> > + if (error) {
> > + iterate_supers_excl(fs_suspend_thaw_sb, NULL);
> > thaw_processes();
> > + }
>
> Does this also have the same problem? i.e. if fs_suspend_freeze_sb()
> skips over superblocks that are already userspace frozen without any
> error, then this will incorrectly thaw those userspace frozen
> filesystems.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-16 15:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-08 1:17 [PATCH 0/6] vfs: provide automatic kernel freeze / resume Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-08 1:17 ` [PATCH 1/6] fs: unify locking semantics for fs freeze / thaw Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-18 5:32 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-25 12:17 ` Jan Kara
2023-06-08 5:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-06-08 19:55 ` Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-08 1:17 ` [PATCH 2/6] fs: add frozen sb state helpers Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-25 12:19 ` Jan Kara
2023-06-08 5:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-06-08 15:05 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-08 1:17 ` [PATCH 3/6] fs: distinguish between user initiated freeze and kernel initiated freeze Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-16 15:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-22 23:42 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-25 14:14 ` Jan Kara
2023-06-06 17:19 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-06-07 9:22 ` Jan Kara
2023-06-07 14:50 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-06-08 20:30 ` Luis Chamberlain
2023-06-07 16:31 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-06-07 20:46 ` Jan Kara
2023-06-08 18:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-06-08 5:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-06-08 9:11 ` Jan Kara
2023-06-08 18:16 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-06-08 5:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-06-08 18:15 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-06-08 20:26 ` Luis Chamberlain
2023-06-08 21:10 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-08 1:17 ` [PATCH 4/6] fs: move !SB_BORN check early on freeze and add for thaw Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-08 1:17 ` [PATCH 5/6] fs: add iterate_supers_excl() and iterate_supers_reverse_excl() Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-08 1:17 ` [PATCH 6/6] fs: add automatic kernel fs freeze / thaw and remove kthread freezing Luis Chamberlain
2023-05-09 1:20 ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-16 15:17 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2023-05-08 1:21 ` [PATCH 0/6] vfs: provide automatic kernel freeze / resume Luis Chamberlain
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=20230516151718.GP858815@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=da.gomez@samsung.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel@tuxforce.de \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
--cc=p.raghav@samsung.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).