From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Leah Rumancik <leah.rumancik@gmail.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
linux-xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
fstests <fstests@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 09/11] xfs: only bother with sync_filesystem during readonly remount
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 16:42:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YrOo5wW6CtkK6p8C@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxi1th2XJ7Ss8avKjrR=k1wMw524+2+ahyafBhSAUsS7dQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 07:54:33PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 7:38 PM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 01:06:39PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
> > >
> > > commit b97cca3ba9098522e5a1c3388764ead42640c1a5 upstream.
> > >
> > > In commit 02b9984d6408, we pushed a sync_filesystem() call from the VFS
> > > into xfs_fs_remount. The only time that we ever need to push dirty file
> > > data or metadata to disk for a remount is if we're remounting the
> > > filesystem read only, so this really could be moved to xfs_remount_ro.
> > >
> > > Once we've moved the call site, actually check the return value from
> > > sync_filesystem.
>
> This part is not really relevant for this backport, do you want me to
> emphasise that?
Not relevant? Making sync_fs return error codes to callers was the
entire reason for creating this series...
> > >
> > > Fixes: 02b9984d6408 ("fs: push sync_filesystem() down to the file system's remount_fs()")
> > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_super.c | 7 +++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > index 6323974d6b3e..dd0439ae6732 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > @@ -1716,6 +1716,11 @@ xfs_remount_ro(
> > > };
> > > int error;
> > >
> > > + /* Flush all the dirty data to disk. */
> > > + error = sync_filesystem(mp->m_super);
> >
> > Looking at 5.10.124's fsync.c and xfs_super.c:
> >
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/fs/sync.c?h=v5.10.124#n31
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c?h=v5.10.124#n755
> >
> > I think this kernel needs the patch(es) that make __sync_filesystem return
> > the errors passed back by ->sync_fs, and I think also the patch that
> > makes xfs_fs_sync_fs return errors encountered by xfs_log_force, right?
>
> It wasn't my intention to fix syncfs() does not return errors in 5.10.
> It has always been that way and IIRC, the relevant patches did not
> apply cleanly.
...because right now userspace can call syncfs() on a filesystem that
dies in the process, and the VFS eats the EIO and returns 0 to
userspace. Yes, that's the historical behavior fo 5.10, but that's a
serious problem that needs addressing. Eliding the sync_filesystem call
during a rw remount is not itself all that exciting.
> THIS patch however, fixes something else, not only the return of the error
> to its caller, so I thought it was worth backporting.
Assuming "something else" means "moving the sync_filesystem callsite" --
that was a secondary piece that I did to get the requisite RVB tag under
time pressure after 5.17-rc6 dropped.
> If you think otherwise, I'll drop it.
On the contrary, I think the ->sync_fs fixes *also* need backporting.
It should be as simple as patching __sync_filesystem:
static int __sync_filesystem(struct super_block *sb, int wait)
{
if (wait)
sync_inodes_sb(sb);
else
writeback_inodes_sb(sb, WB_REASON_SYNC);
if (sb->s_op->sync_fs) {
int ret = sb->s_op->sync_fs(sb, wait);
if (ret)
return ret;
}
return __sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev, wait);
}
Granted, that can be a part of the next batch. If you plan to pick up
the vfs sync_fs changes then I guess this one's ok for inclusion now.
--D
>
> Thanks,
> Amir.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-22 23:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-17 10:06 [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 00/11] xfs stable candidate patches for 5.10.y (v5.15+) Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 01/11] xfs: use kmem_cache_free() for kmem_cache objects Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 02/11] xfs: punch out data fork delalloc blocks on COW writeback failure Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 03/11] xfs: Fix the free logic of state in xfs_attr_node_hasname Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 16:32 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-22 18:46 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 21:50 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 04/11] xfs: remove all COW fork extents when remounting readonly Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 05/11] xfs: check sb_meta_uuid for dabuf buffer recovery Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 06/11] xfs: refactor xfs_file_fsync Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 07/11] xfs: xfs_log_force_lsn isn't passed a LSN Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 16:45 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-22 17:09 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 08/11] xfs: prevent UAF in xfs_log_item_in_current_chkpt Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 09/11] xfs: only bother with sync_filesystem during readonly remount Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 16:38 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-22 16:54 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 23:42 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2022-06-23 6:38 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 10/11] xfs: fix up non-directory creation in SGID directories Amir Goldstein
2022-06-17 10:06 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 11/11] xfs: use setattr_copy to set vfs inode attributes Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 16:41 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-22 18:36 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 22:17 ` Leah Rumancik
2022-06-23 4:22 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-06-22 23:45 ` [PATCH 5.10 CANDIDATE 00/11] xfs stable candidate patches for 5.10.y (v5.15+) Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-23 7:33 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-06-23 16:05 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-07-24 8:36 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-07-26 2:10 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-07-26 8:41 ` Amir Goldstein
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=YrOo5wW6CtkK6p8C@magnolia \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=leah.rumancik@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@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