public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>
Cc: "Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
	"linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	"darrick.wong@oracle.com" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: 5.3-rc1 regression with XFS log recovery
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:26:43 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190821002643.GK1119@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190818173426.GA32311@lst.de>

On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 07:34:26PM +0200, hch@lst.de wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:41:40AM +0200, hch@lst.de wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:11:28AM +0200, hch@lst.de wrote:
> > > > The kernel log shows the following when the mount fails:
> > > 
> > > Is it always that same message?  I'll see if I can reproduce it,
> > > but I won't have that much memory to spare to create fake pmem,
> > > hope this also works with a single device and/or less memory..
> > 
> > I've reproduced a similar ASSERT with a small pmem device, so I hope
> > I can debug the issue locally now.
> 
> So I can also reproduce the same issue with the ramdisk driver, but not
> with any other 4k sector size device (nvmet, scsi target, scsi_debug,
> loop).  Which made me wonder if there is some issue about the memory
> passed in, and indeed just switching to plain vmalloc vs the XFS
> kmem_alloc_large wrapper that either uses kmalloc or vmalloc fixes
> the issue for me.  I don't really understand why yet, maybe I need to
> dig out alignment testing patches.
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> index 13d1d3e95b88..918ad3b884a7 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ xlog_alloc_buffer(
>  	if (nbblks > 1 && log->l_sectBBsize > 1)
>  		nbblks += log->l_sectBBsize;
>  	nbblks = round_up(nbblks, log->l_sectBBsize);
> -	return kmem_alloc_large(BBTOB(nbblks), KM_MAYFAIL);
> +	return vmalloc(BBTOB(nbblks));
>  }

After thinking on this for a bit, I suspect the better thing to do
here is add a KM_ALIGNED flag to the allocation, so if the internal
kmem_alloc() returns an unaligned pointer we free it and fall
through to vmalloc() to get a properly aligned pointer....

That way none of the other interfaces have to change, and we can
then use kmem_alloc_large() everywhere we allocate buffers for IO.
And we don't need new infrastructure just to support these debug
configurations, either.

Actually, kmem_alloc_io() might be a better idea - keep the aligned
flag internal to the kmem code. Seems like a pretty simple solution
to the entire problem we have here...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-08-21  0:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-16 20:59 5.3-rc1 regression with XFS log recovery Verma, Vishal L
2019-08-18  7:11 ` hch
2019-08-18  7:41   ` hch
2019-08-18 17:34     ` hch
2019-08-19  0:08       ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-19  3:49         ` hch
2019-08-19  4:11           ` hch
2019-08-19  4:22             ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-19  4:29               ` hch
2019-08-19  4:40                 ` hch
2019-08-19  5:31                   ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-20  6:14                     ` hch
2019-08-20  4:41                   ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-20  5:53                     ` hch
2019-08-20  7:44                       ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-20  8:13                       ` Ming Lei
2019-08-20  9:24                         ` Ming Lei
2019-08-20 16:30                           ` Verma, Vishal L
2019-08-20 21:44                           ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-20 22:08                             ` Verma, Vishal L
2019-08-20 23:53                               ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-21  2:19                               ` Ming Lei
2019-08-21  1:56                             ` Ming Lei
2019-08-19  4:15           ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-19 17:19       ` Verma, Vishal L
2019-08-21  0:26       ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2019-08-21  0:44         ` hch
2019-08-21  1:08           ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-21  1:56             ` Verma, Vishal L
2019-08-21  6:15               ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-26 17:32       ` Verma, Vishal L

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=20190821002643.GK1119@dread.disaster.area \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.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