public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: punch all delalloc blocks beyond EOF on write failure.
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:45:20 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1335519922-14371-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335519922-14371-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>

I've been seeing regular ASSERT failures in xfstests when running
fsstress based tests over the past month. xfs_getbmap() has been
failing this test:

XFS: Assertion failed: ((iflags & BMV_IF_DELALLOC) != 0) ||
(map[i].br_startblock != DELAYSTARTBLOCK), file: fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c,
line: 5650

where it is encountering a delayed allocation extent after writing
all the dirty data to disk and then walking the extent map
atomically by holding the XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED to prevent new delayed
allocation extents from being created.

Test 083 on a 512 byte block size filesystem was used to reproduce
the problem, because it only had a 5s run timeand would usually fail
every 3-4 runs. This test is exercising ENOSPC behaviour by running
fsstress on a nearly full filesystem. The following trace extract
shows the final few events on the inode that tripped the assert:

 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_EXCL caller xfs_setfilesize
 xfs_setfilesize:       isize 0x180000 disize 0x12d400 offset 0x17e200 count 7680

file size updated to 0x180000 by IO completion

 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_EXCL caller xfs_iomap_write_delay
 xfs_iext_insert:       state  idx 3 offset 3072 block 4503599627239432 count 1 flag 0 caller xfs_bmap_add_extent_hole_delay
 xfs_get_blocks_alloc:  size 0x180000 offset 0x180000 count 512 type  startoff 0xc00 startblock -1 blockcount 0x1
 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_EXCL caller __xfs_get_blocks

delalloc write, adding a single block at offset 0x180000

 xfs_delalloc_enospc:   isize 0x180000 disize 0x180000 offset 0x180200 count 512

ENOSPC trying to allocate a dellalloc block at offset 0x180200

 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_EXCL caller xfs_iomap_write_delay
 xfs_get_blocks_alloc:  size 0x180000 offset 0x180200 count 512 type  startoff 0xc00 startblock -1 blockcount 0x2

And succeeding on retry after flushing dirty inodes.

 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_EXCL caller __xfs_get_blocks
 xfs_delalloc_enospc:   isize 0x180000 disize 0x180000 offset 0x180400 count 512

ENOSPC trying to allocate a dellalloc block at offset 0x180400

 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_EXCL caller xfs_iomap_write_delay
 xfs_delalloc_enospc:   isize 0x180000 disize 0x180000 offset 0x180400 count 512

And failing the retry, giving a real ENOSPC error.

 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_EXCL caller xfs_vm_write_failed
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The smoking gun - the write being failed and cleaning up delalloc
blocks beyond EOF allocated by the failed write.

 xfs_getattr:
 xfs_ilock:             flags IOLOCK_SHARED caller xfs_getbmap
 xfs_ilock:             flags ILOCK_SHARED caller xfs_ilock_map_shared

And that's where we died almost immediately afterwards.
xfs_bmapi_read() found delalloc extent beyond current file in memory
file size. Some debug I added to xfs_getbmap() showed the state just
before the assert failure:

 ino 0x80e48: off 0xc00, fsb 0xffffffffffffffff, len 0x1, size 0x180000
 start_fsb 0x106, end_fsb 0x638
 ino flags 0x2 nex 0xd bmvcnt 0x555, len 0x3c58a6f23c0bf1, start 0xc00
 ext 0: off 0x1fc, fsb 0x24782, len 0x254
 ext 1: off 0x450, fsb 0x40851, len 0x30
 ext 2: off 0x480, fsb 0xd99, len 0x1b8
 ext 3: off 0x92f, fsb 0x4099a, len 0x3b
 ext 4: off 0x96d, fsb 0x41844, len 0x98
 ext 5: off 0xbf1, fsb 0x408ab, len 0xf

which shows that we found a single delalloc block beyond EOF (first
line of output) when we were returning the map for a length
somewhere around 10^16 bytes long (second line), and the on-disk
extents showed they didn't go past EOF (last lines).

Further debug added to xfs_vm_write_failed() showed this happened
when punching out delalloc blocks beyond the end of the file after
the failed write:

[  132.606693] ino 0x80e48: vwf to 0x181000, sze 0x180000
[  132.609573] start_fsb 0xc01, end_fsb 0xc08

It punched the range 0xc01 -> 0xc08, but the range we really need to
punch is 0xc00 -> 0xc07 (8 blocks from 0xc00) as this testing was
run on a 512 byte block size filesystem (8 blocks per page).
the punch from is 0xc00. So end_fsb is correct, but start_fsb is
wrong as we punch from start_fsb for (end_fsb - start_fsb) blocks.
Hence we are not punching the delalloc block beyond EOF in the case.

The fix is simple - it's a silly off-by-one mistake in calculating
the range. It's especially silly because the macro used to calculate
the start_fsb already takes into account the case where the inode
size is an exact multiple of the filesystem block size...

Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
---
 fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
index b66766a..64ed87a 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
@@ -1431,7 +1431,7 @@ xfs_vm_write_failed(
 		 * Check if there are any blocks that are outside of i_size
 		 * that need to be trimmed back.
 		 */
-		start_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(ip->i_mount, inode->i_size) + 1;
+		start_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(ip->i_mount, inode->i_size);
 		end_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(ip->i_mount, to);
 		if (end_fsb <= start_fsb)
 			return;
-- 
1.7.10

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-27  9:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-27  9:45 [PATCH 0/3] xfs: failed writes and stale delalloc blocks Dave Chinner
2012-04-27  9:45 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-04-30 13:49   ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: punch all delalloc blocks beyond EOF on write failure Christoph Hellwig
2012-04-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs: punch new delalloc blocks out of failed writes inside EOF Dave Chinner
2012-05-07 22:00   ` Ben Myers
2012-04-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: prevent needless mount warning causing test failures Dave Chinner
2012-05-08 16:29   ` Ben Myers
2012-05-08 22:42     ` Dave Chinner
2012-04-29 11:16 ` [PATCH 4/3] xfs: don't assert on delalloc regions beyond EOF Dave Chinner
2012-05-08 17:26   ` Ben Myers
2012-04-29 12:43 ` [PATCH 5/3] xfs: limit specualtive delalloc to maxioffset Dave Chinner
2012-05-08 18:02   ` Ben Myers
2012-04-29 12:57 ` [PATCH 6/3] xfs: make largest supported offset less shouty Dave Chinner
2012-04-29 21:58   ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-04-30  1:11     ` Dave Chinner
2012-04-30  3:03       ` Dave Chinner
2012-05-08 18:15   ` Ben Myers
2012-05-08 22:43     ` Dave Chinner
2012-05-09 19:14       ` Ben Myers

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=1335519922-14371-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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