Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: xfs_check_page_type buffer checks need help

Dave Chinner
2014-03-05T23:21:34Z

On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 05:08:20PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 12:11:32PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> >
> > xfs_aops_discard_page() was introduced in the following commit:
> >
> > xfs: truncate delalloc extents when IO fails in writeback
> >
> > ... to clean up left over delalloc ranges after I/O failure in
> > ->writepage(). generic/224 tests for this scenario and occasionally
> > reproduces panics on sub-4k blocksize filesystems.
> >
> > The cause of this is failure to clean up the delalloc range on a
> > page where the first buffer does not match one of the expected
> > states of xfs_check_page_type(). If a buffer is not unwritten,
> > delayed or dirty&mapped, xfs_check_page_type() stops and
> > immediately returns 0.
....
> > @@ -777,6 +795,7 @@ xfs_convert_page(
> > count++;
> > } else {
> > done = 1;
> > + break;
> > }
> > } while (offset += len, (bh = bh->b_this_page) != head);
> >
>
> The next couple lines after the loop are:
>
> if (uptodate && bh == head)
> SetPageUptodate(page);
>
> Now that we can break out of the loop, the "bh == head" part of that
> check might not necessarily mean what it used to mean. The uptodate
> variable is initialized to 1 and we reset to 0 the moment we encounter a
> !uptodate buffer. Do you think it's possible to get here on the first
> buffer of the page, without having reset 'uptodate,' and potentially
> incorrectly set the page uptodate?

Good question :)

I don't think this can happen because if the first buffer on the
page can't be written, xfs_check_page_type() will return false and
we won't get to the loop. By definition, buffer_unwritten() implies
buffer_uptodate(), as does buffer_delay() and buffer_dirty(). Hence
any of the types that will return acceptible will have the first
buffer uptodate.

As for the other breaks in the loop - the initial imap_valid check
ensures we have a map that covers the entire region of the page that
needs writing, and we know that offset < end_offset for the first
buffer on the page. Hence none of the loop breaks will trigger on
the first buffer, and so the above code should not trigger.

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com