public inbox for linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zhang Yi <yizhang089@gmail.com>
To: Diangang Li <lidiangang@bytedance.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>,
	Diangang Li <diangangli@gmail.com>
Cc: tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	changfengnan@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] ext4: fail fast on repeated metadata reads after IO failure
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 22:27:13 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e5c657e6-ffbd-4327-adaf-ae52cb50b96d@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c6f4b982-c6e4-4f77-a16d-0c381c1e25f0@bytedance.com>

Hi, Diangang,

On 3/25/2026 7:13 PM, Diangang Li wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> BH_Read_EIO is cleared on successful read or write.

I think what Andreas means is, since you modified the ext4_read_bh() 
interface, if the bh to be read already has the Read_EIO flag set, then 
subsequent read operations through this interface will directly return 
failure without issuing a read I/O. At the same time, because its state 
is also not uptodate, for an existing block, a write request will not be 
issued either. How can we clear this Read_EIO flag? IIRC, relying solely 
on ext4_read_bh_nowait() doesn't seem sufficient to achieve this.

Thanks,
Yi.

> 
> In practice bad blocks are typically repaired/remapped on write, so we
> expect recovery after a successful rewrite. If the block is never
> rewritten, repeatedly issuing the same failing read does not help.
> 
> We clear the flag on successful reads so the buffer can recover
> immediately if the error was transient. Since read-ahead reads are not
> blocked, a later successful read-ahead will clear the flag and allow
> subsequent synchronous readers to proceed normally.
> 
> Best,
> Diangang
> 
> On 3/25/26 6:15 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>> On Mar 25, 2026, at 03:33, Diangang Li <diangangli@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Diangang Li <lidiangang@bytedance.com>
>>>
>>> ext4 metadata reads serialize on BH_Lock (lock_buffer). If the read fails,
>>> the buffer remains !Uptodate. With concurrent callers, each waiter can
>>> retry the same failing read after the previous holder drops BH_Lock. This
>>> amplifies device retry latency and may trigger hung tasks.
>>>
>>> In the normal read path the block driver already performs its own retries.
>>> Once the retries keep failing, re-submitting the same metadata read from
>>> the filesystem just amplifies the latency by serializing waiters on
>>> BH_Lock.
>>>
>>> Remember read failures on buffer_head and fail fast for ext4 metadata reads
>>> once a buffer has already failed to read. Clear the flag on successful
>>> read/write completion so the buffer can recover. ext4 read-ahead uses
>>> ext4_read_bh_nowait(), so it does not set the failure flag and remains
>>> best-effort.
>>
>> Not that the patch is bad, but if the BH_Read_EIO flag is set on a buffer
>> and it prevents other tasks from reading that block again, how would the
>> buffer ever become Uptodate to clear the flag?  There isn't enough state
>> in a 1-bit flag to have any kind of expiry and later retry.
>>
>> Cheers, Andreas
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-25 14:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-25  9:33 [RFC PATCH 0/1] ext4: fail fast on repeated metadata reads after IO failure Diangang Li
2026-03-25  9:33 ` [RFC 1/1] " Diangang Li
2026-03-25 10:15   ` Andreas Dilger
2026-03-25 11:13     ` Diangang Li
2026-03-25 14:27       ` Zhang Yi [this message]
2026-03-26  2:26         ` changfengnan
2026-03-26  7:42         ` Diangang Li
2026-03-26 11:09           ` Zhang Yi
2026-03-25 15:06     ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-03-26 12:09       ` Diangang Li

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=e5c657e6-ffbd-4327-adaf-ae52cb50b96d@gmail.com \
    --to=yizhang089@gmail.com \
    --cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
    --cc=changfengnan@bytedance.com \
    --cc=diangangli@gmail.com \
    --cc=lidiangang@bytedance.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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