Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs

Kent Overstreet
2023-06-28T17:55:19Z

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 08:58:45AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 6/27/23 10:01?PM, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 09:16:31PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 6/27/23 2:15?PM, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> >>>> to ktest/tests/xfstests/ and run it with -bcachefs, otherwise it kept
> >>>> failing because it assumed it was XFS.
> >>>>
> >>>> I suspected this was just a timing issue, and it looks like that's
> >>>> exactly what it is. Looking at the test case, it'll randomly kill -9
> >>>> fsstress, and if that happens while we have io_uring IO pending, then we
> >>>> process completions inline (for a PF_EXITING current). This means they
> >>>> get pushed to fallback work, which runs out of line. If we hit that case
> >>>> AND the timing is such that it hasn't been processed yet, we'll still be
> >>>> holding a file reference under the mount point and umount will -EBUSY
> >>>> fail.
> >>>>
> >>>> As far as I can tell, this can happen with aio as well, it's just harder
> >>>> to hit. If the fput happens while the task is exiting, then fput will
> >>>> end up being delayed through a workqueue as well. The test case assumes
> >>>> that once it's reaped the exit of the killed task that all files are
> >>>> released, which isn't necessarily true if they are done out-of-line.
> >>>
> >>> Yeah, I traced it through to the delayed fput code as well.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure delayed fput is responsible here; what I learned when I was
> >>> tracking this down has mostly fell out of my brain, so take anything I
> >>> say with a large grain of salt. But I believe I tested with delayed_fput
> >>> completely disabled, and found another thing in io_uring with the same
> >>> effect as delayed_fput that wasn't being flushed.
> >>
> >> I'm not saying it's delayed_fput(), I'm saying it's the delayed putting
> >> io_uring can end up doing. But yes, delayed_fput() is another candidate.
> >
> > Sorry - was just working through my recollections/initial thought
> > process out loud
>
> No worries, it might actually be a combination and this is why my
> io_uring side patch didn't fully resolve it. Wrote a simple reproducer
> and it seems to reliably trigger it, but is fixed with an flush of the
> delayed fput list on mount -EBUSY return. Still digging...
>
> >>>> For io_uring specifically, it may make sense to wait on the fallback
> >>>> work. The below patch does this, and should fix the issue. But I'm not
> >>>> fully convinced that this is really needed, as I do think this can
> >>>> happen without io_uring as well. It just doesn't right now as the test
> >>>> does buffered IO, and aio will be fully sync with buffered IO. That
> >>>> means there's either no gap where aio will hit it without O_DIRECT, or
> >>>> it's just small enough that it hasn't been hit.
> >>>
> >>> I just tried your patch and I still have generic/388 failing - it
> >>> might've taken a bit longer to pop this time.
> >>
> >> Yep see the same here. Didn't have time to look into it after sending
> >> that email today, just took a quick stab at writing a reproducer and
> >> ended up crashing bcachefs:
> >
> > You must have hit an error before we finished initializing the
> > filesystem, the list head never got initialized. Patch for that will be
> > in the testing branch momentarily.
>
> I'll pull that in. In testing just now, I hit a few more leaks:
>
> unreferenced object 0xffff0000e55cf200 (size 128):
> comm "mount", pid 723, jiffies 4294899134 (age 85.868s)
> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> backtrace:
> [<000000001d69062c>] slab_post_alloc_hook.isra.0+0xb4/0xbc
> [<00000000c503def2>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0xd0/0x178
> [<00000000cde48528>] __kmalloc+0xac/0xd4
> [<000000006cb9446a>] kmalloc_array.constprop.0+0x18/0x20
> [<000000008341b32c>] bch2_fs_alloc+0x73c/0xbcc

Can you faddr2line this? I just did a bunch of kmemleak testing and
didn't see it.

> unreferenced object 0xffff0000e55cf480 (size 128):
> comm "mount", pid 723, jiffies 4294899134 (age 85.868s)
> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> backtrace:
> [<000000001d69062c>] slab_post_alloc_hook.isra.0+0xb4/0xbc
> [<00000000c503def2>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0xd0/0x178
> [<00000000cde48528>] __kmalloc+0xac/0xd4
> [<0000000097f806f1>] __prealloc_shrinker+0x3c/0x60
> [<000000008ff20762>] register_shrinker+0x14/0x34
> [<000000003d050c32>] bch2_fs_btree_key_cache_init+0x88/0x90
> [<00000000d9f351c0>] bch2_fs_alloc+0x7c0/0xbcc
> [<000000003b8339fd>] bch2_fs_open+0x19c/0x430
> [<00000000aef40a23>] bch2_mount+0x194/0x45c
> [<0000000005e49357>] legacy_get_tree+0x2c/0x54
> [<00000000f5813622>] vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xd4
> [<00000000ea6972ec>] path_mount+0x5d0/0x6c8
> [<00000000468ec307>] do_mount+0x80/0xa4
> [<00000000ea5d305d>] __arm64_sys_mount+0x150/0x168
> [<00000000da6d98cb>] invoke_syscall.constprop.0+0x70/0xb8
> [<000000008f20c487>] do_el0_svc+0xbc/0xf0

This one is actually a bug in unregister_shrinker(), I have a patch I'll
have to send to Andrew.