From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: recheck appropriateness of map_shared lock
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2023 18:05:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230411010531.GE360889@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y8mMailEevUSZkG+@infradead.org>
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 10:31:06AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 05:24:58PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > xfs_ilock(ip, lock_mode);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * It's possible that the unlocked access of the data fork to determine
> > + * the lock mode could have raced with another thread that was failing
> > + * to load the bmbt but hadn't yet torn down the iext tree. Recheck
> > + * the lock mode and upgrade to an exclusive lock if we need to.
> > + */
> > + if (lock_mode == XFS_ILOCK_SHARED &&
> > + xfs_need_iread_extents(&ip->i_df)) {
>
> Eww. I think the proper fix here is to make sure
> xfs_need_iread_extents does not return false until we're actually
> read the extents. So I think we'll need a new inode flag
> XFS_INEED_READ - gets set when reading inode in btree format,
> and gets cleared at the very end of xfs_iread_extents once we know
> the read succeeded.
So I finally cleared enough off my plate to get back to this, and
reworking the patch this way *looks* promising. It definitely fixes the
xfs/375 problems, and over the weekend I didn't see any obvious splats.
--D
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-11 1:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-19 1:24 [PATCH] xfs: recheck appropriateness of map_shared lock Darrick J. Wong
2023-01-19 5:14 ` Dave Chinner
2023-01-19 18:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-19 20:34 ` Dave Chinner
2023-02-28 20:08 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-01-19 18:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-04-11 1:05 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
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=20230411010531.GE360889@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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