ocfs2-devel.oss.oracle.com archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi@oracle.com>
To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] ocfs2: A race between refmap setting and clearing
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 12:28:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <569C69E4.6030500@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <569609BE.8050802@huawei.com>

On 01/13/2016 04:24 PM, Joseph Qi wrote:
> Hi Junxiao,
> 
> On 2016/1/13 15:00, Junxiao Bi wrote:
>> On 01/13/2016 02:21 PM, xuejiufei wrote:
>>> Hi Junxiao,
>>> I have not describe the issue clearly.
>>>
>>> Node 1                               Node 2(master)
>>> dlmlock
>>> dlm_do_master_request
>>>                                 dlm_master_request_handler
>>>                                 -> dlm_lockres_set_refmap_bit
>>> dlmlock succeed
>>> dlmunlock succeed
>>>
>>> dlm_purge_lockres
>>>                                 dlm_deref_handler
>>>                                 -> find lock resource is in
>>>                                    DLM_LOCK_RES_SETREF_INPROG state,
>>>                                    so dispatch a deref work
>>> dlm_purge_lockres succeed.
>>>
>>> call dlmlock again
>>> dlm_do_master_request
>>>                                 dlm_master_request_handler
>>>                                 -> dlm_lockres_set_refmap_bit
>>>
>>>                                 deref work trigger, call
>>>                                 dlm_lockres_clear_refmap_bit
>>>                                 to clear Node 1 from refmap
>>>
>>>                                 dlm_purge_lockres succeed
>>>
>>> dlm_send_remote_lock_request
>>>                                 return DLM_IVLOCKID because
>>>                                 the lockres is not exist
>> More clear now. Thank you.
>> This is a very complicated race. I didn't have a good solution to fix it
>> now. Your fix looks work, but I am afraid if we keep going fix this
>> kinds of races case by case, we will make dlm harder to understand and
>> easy to involve bugs, maybe we should think about refactor dlm.
>>
> Agree. IMO, the root cause is bit op cannot handle such a case.
> I wonder if we have to change it to refcount, which may require a much
> bigger refactoring.
one bit for each node seems reasonable, as lockres is per node. I think
the cause is the dis-order of set/clear, i am trying to see whether they
can be made happen in order.

Thanks,
Junxiao.
> 
> Thanks,
> Joseph
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Junxiao.
>>
>>> BUG if the lockres is $RECOVERY
>>>
>>> On 2016/1/13 10:46, Junxiao Bi wrote:
>>>> On 01/12/2016 03:16 PM, xuejiufei wrote:
>>>>> Hi, Junxiao
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2016/1/12 12:03, Junxiao Bi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Jiufei,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/11/2016 10:46 AM, xuejiufei wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> We have found a race between refmap setting and clearing which
>>>>>>> will cause the lock resource on master is freed before other nodes
>>>>>>> purge it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Node 1                               Node 2(master)
>>>>>>> dlm_do_master_request
>>>>>>>                                 dlm_master_request_handler
>>>>>>>                                 -> dlm_lockres_set_refmap_bit
>>>>>>> call dlm_purge_lockres after unlock
>>>>>>>                                 dlm_deref_handler
>>>>>>>                                 -> find lock resource is in
>>>>>>>                                    DLM_LOCK_RES_SETREF_INPROG state,
>>>>>>>                                    so dispatch a deref work
>>>>>>> dlm_purge_lockres succeed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dlm_do_master_request
>>>>>>>                                 dlm_master_request_handler
>>>>>>>                                 -> dlm_lockres_set_refmap_bit
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                                 deref work trigger, call
>>>>>>>                                 dlm_lockres_clear_refmap_bit
>>>>>>>                                 to clear Node 1 from refmap
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now Node 2 can purge the lock resource but the owner of lock resource
>>>>>>> on Node 1 is still Node 2 which may trigger BUG if the lock resource
>>>>>>> is $RECOVERY or other problems.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have discussed 2 solutions:
>>>>>>> 1)The master return error to Node 1 if the DLM_LOCK_RES_SETREF_INPROG
>>>>>>> is set. Node 1 will not retry and master send another message to Node 1
>>>>>>> after clearing the refmap. Node 1 can purge the lock resource after the
>>>>>>> refmap on master is cleared.
>>>>>>> 2) The master return error to Node 1 if the DLM_LOCK_RES_SETREF_INPROG
>>>>>>> is set, and Node 1 will retry to deref the lockres.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anybody has better ideas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> dlm_purge_lockres() will wait to drop ref until
>>>>>> DLM_LOCK_RES_SETREF_INPROG cleared. So if set this flag when find the
>>>>>> master during doing master request. And then this flag was cleared when
>>>>>> receiving assert master message, can this fix the issue?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think this can fix. Before doing master request, the lock resource is
>>>>> already purged. The master should clear the refmap before client purge it.
>>>> inflight_locks is increased in dlm_get_lock_resource() which will stop
>>>> lockres purged? Set DLM_LOCK_RES_SETREF_INPROG when found lockres owner
>>>> during master request, then this will stop lockres purged after unlock?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Junxiao.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jiufei
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Junxiao.
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> --Jiufei
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> .
>>
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-18  4:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-11  2:46 [Ocfs2-devel] ocfs2: A race between refmap setting and clearing xuejiufei
2016-01-12  4:03 ` Junxiao Bi
2016-01-12  7:16   ` xuejiufei
2016-01-13  2:46     ` Junxiao Bi
2016-01-13  6:21       ` xuejiufei
2016-01-13  7:00         ` Junxiao Bi
2016-01-13  8:24           ` Joseph Qi
2016-01-18  4:28             ` Junxiao Bi [this message]
2016-01-18  7:07               ` xuejiufei
2016-01-19  3:03                 ` Junxiao Bi
2016-01-19  8:19                   ` xuejiufei
2016-01-19  9:02                     ` Junxiao Bi
2016-01-21  7:34 ` Junxiao Bi
2016-01-26  1:43   ` xuejiufei
2016-01-26  2:45     ` Junxiao Bi

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=569C69E4.6030500@oracle.com \
    --to=junxiao.bi@oracle.com \
    --cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).