public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: inode log reservations are too small
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 08:00:46 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <521DF47E.6060003@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1377670235-4168-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

On 08/28/13 01:10, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com>
>
> We've been seeing occasional problems with log space leaks and
> transaction underruns such as this for some time:
>
>   XFS (dm-0): xlog_write: reservation summary:
>     trans type  = FSYNC_TS (36)
>     unit res    = 2740 bytes
>     current res = -4 bytes
>     total reg   = 0 bytes (o/flow = 0 bytes)
>     ophdrs      = 0 (ophdr space = 0 bytes)
>     ophdr + reg = 0 bytes
>     num regions = 0
>
> Turns out that xfstests generic/311 is reliably reproducing this
> problem with the test it runs at sequence 16 of it execution. It is
> a 100% reliable reproducer with the mkfs configuration of "-b
> size=1024 -m crc=1" on a 10GB scratch device.
>
> The problem? Inode forks in btree format are logged in memory
> format, not disk format (i.e. bmbt format, not bmdr format). That
> means there is a btree block header being logged, when such a
> structure is never written to the inode fork in bmdr format. The
> bmdr header in the inode is only 4 bytes, while the bmbt header is
> 24 bytes for v4 filesystems and 72 bytes for v5 filesystems.
>
> We currently reserve the inode size plus the rounded up overhead of
> a logging a buffer, which is 128 bytes. That means the reservation
> for a 512 byte inode is 640 bytes. What we can actually log is:
>
> 	inode core, data and attr fork = 512 bytes
> 	inode log format + log op header = 56 + 12 = 68 bytes
> 	data fork bmbt hdr = 24/72 bytes
> 	attr fork bmbt hdr = 24/72 bytes
>
> So, for a v2 inodes we can log at least 628 bytes, but if we split that
> inode over the end of the log across log buffers, we need to also
> another log op header, which takes us to 640 bytes. If there's
> another reservation taken out of this that I haven't taken into
> account (perhaps multiple iclog splits?) or I haven't corectly
> calculated the bmbt format space used (entirely possible), then
> we will overun it.
>
> For v3 inodes the maximum is actually 724 bytes, and even a
> single maximally sized btree format fork can blow it (652 bytes).
> And that's exactly what is happening with the FSYNC_TS transaction
> in the above output - it's consumed 644 bytes of space after the CIL
> context took the space reserved for it (2100 bytes).
>
> This problem has always been present in the XFS code - the btree
> format inode forks have always been logged in this manner. Hence
> there has always been the possibility of an overrun with such a
> transaction. The CRC code has just exposed it frequently enough to
> be able to debug and understand the root cause....
>
> So, let's fix all the inode log space reservations.
>
> [ I'm so glad we spent the effort to clean up the transaction
>    reservation code. This is an easy fix now. ]

Looks good. Thanks for chasing it to the root cause.

Reviewed-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>

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

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-28 13:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-28  6:10 [PATCH] xfs: inode log reservations are too small Dave Chinner
2013-08-28 13:00 ` Mark Tinguely [this message]
2013-08-29  8:20 ` Chris Dunlop
2013-08-30 18:57 ` 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=521DF47E.6060003@sgi.com \
    --to=tinguely@sgi.com \
    --cc=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