public inbox for stable@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yongpeng Yang <monty_pavel@sina.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix node_cnt race between extent node destroy and writeback
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:44:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <252cb446-e313-417b-b780-85dcdcf34a87@sina.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bedd1951-681b-4364-80c9-c7fe6886c992@kernel.org>


On 4/20/26 15:28, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
> On 4/19/2026 12:29 AM, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>
>> On 4/18/26 8:51 AM, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
>>> On 4/17/26 21:26, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/17/26 17:00, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
>>>>> On 4/3/26 22:40, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>>>>> From: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> f2fs_destroy_extent_node() does not set FI_NO_EXTENT before clearing
>>>>>> extent nodes. When called from f2fs_drop_inode() with I_SYNC set,
>>>>>> concurrent kworker writeback can insert new extent nodes into the
>>>>>> same
>>>>>> extent tree, racing with the destroy and triggering f2fs_bug_on() in
>>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(). The scenario is as follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> drop inode                            writeback
>>>>>>     - iput
>>>>>>      - f2fs_drop_inode  // I_SYNC set
>>>>>>       - f2fs_destroy_extent_node
>>>>>>        - __destroy_extent_node
>>>>>>         - while (node_cnt) {
>>>>>>            write_lock(&et->lock)
>>>>>>            __free_extent_tree
>>>>>>            write_unlock(&et->lock)
>>>>>>                                           - __writeback_single_inode
>>>>>>                                            - f2fs_outplace_write_data
>>>>>>                                             -
>>>>>> f2fs_update_read_extent_cache
>>>>>>                                              -
>>>>>> __update_extent_tree_range
>>>>>>                                               // FI_NO_EXTENT not
>>>>>> set,
>>>>>>                                               // insert new extent
>>>>>> node
>>>>>>           } // node_cnt == 0, exit while
>>>>>>         - f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt)  // node_cnt > 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additionally, __update_extent_tree_range() only checks
>>>>>> FI_NO_EXTENT for
>>>>>> EX_READ type, leaving EX_BLOCK_AGE updates completely unprotected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch set FI_NO_EXTENT under et->lock in
>>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(),
>>>>>> consistent with other callers (__update_extent_tree_range and
>>>>>> __drop_extent_tree) and check FI_NO_EXTENT for both EX_READ and
>>>>>> EX_BLOCK_AGE tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suffered below test failure, then I bisect to this change.
>>>>>
>>>>>       generic/475  84s ... [failed, exit status 1]- output mismatch
>>>>> (see /
>>>>> share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad)
>>>>>       --- tests/generic/475.out   2025-01-12 21:57:40.279440664 +0800
>>>>>       +++ /share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad 2026-04-17
>>>>> 12:08:28.000000000 +0800
>>>>>       @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@
>>>>>        QA output created by 475
>>>>>        Silence is golden.
>>>>>       +mount: /mnt/scratch_f2fs: mount system call failed: Structure
>>>>> needs
>>>>> cleaning.
>>>>>       +       dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount
>>>>> system
>>>>> call.
>>>>>       +mount failed
>>>>>       +(see /share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.full for details)
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>       (Run 'diff -u /share/git/fstests/tests/generic/475.out /
>>>>> share/git/
>>>>> fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       generic/388  73s ... [failed, exit status 1]- output mismatch
>>>>> (see /
>>>>> share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad)
>>>>>       --- tests/generic/388.out   2025-01-12 21:57:40.275440602 +0800
>>>>>       +++ /share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad 2026-04-17
>>>>> 11:58:05.000000000 +0800
>>>>>       @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@
>>>>>        QA output created by 388
>>>>>        Silence is golden.
>>>>>       +mount: /mnt/scratch_f2fs: mount system call failed: Structure
>>>>> needs
>>>>> cleaning.
>>>>>       +       dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount
>>>>> system
>>>>> call.
>>>>>       +cycle mount failed
>>>>>       +(see /share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.full for details)
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>       (Run 'diff -u /share/git/fstests/tests/generic/388.out /
>>>>> share/git/
>>>>> fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       F2FS-fs (dm-0): sanity_check_extent_cache: inode (ino=1761)
>>>>> extent
>>>>> info [220057, 57, 6] is incorrect, run fsck to fix
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect we may miss any extent updates after we set FI_NO_EXTENT in
>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(), result in failing in
>>>>> sanity_check_extent_cache().
>>>>>
>>>>> Can we just relocate f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt) rather than complicated
>>>>> change?
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I overlooked largest extent. How about relocate
>>>> f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt) to __destroy_extent_tree?
>>>>
>>>> static void __destroy_extent_tree(struct inode *inode, enum extent_type
>>>> type)
>>>>
>>>>           /* free all extent info belong to this extent tree */
>>>>           node_cnt = __destroy_extent_node(inode, type);
>>>> +       f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));
>>>
>>>       /* free all extent info belong to this extent tree */
>>>       node_cnt = __destroy_extent_node(inode, type);
>>>
>>>       /* delete extent tree entry in radix tree */
>>>       mutex_lock(&eti->extent_tree_lock);
>>>       f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));  <---
>>>
>>> Oh, it has already checked node_cnt, so, maybe we can just remove the
>>> check in
>>> __destroy_extent_node()?
>>
>> Yes. BTW, is it correct to remove the call to f2fs_destroy_extent_node()
>> in f2fs_drop_inode()? It seems this call is unnecessary, since
>> f2fs_evict_inode() will eventually delete all extent nodes properly.
> 
> I think it's fine to keep it according to original intention "destroy
> extent_tree for the truncation case" introduced from 3e72f721390d
> ("f2fs: use extent_cache by default"). It helps the performance w/
> in batch extent node release.

Oh, I see. This patch has already been merged into the dev branch. Which
of the following approaches would be more appropriate?
1. Drop the current patch from the dev branch, then submit a patch to
remove the f2fs_bug_on() in __destroy_extent_node.
2. Send two patches: the first reverts the change, and the second
removes the f2fs_bug_on() in __destroy_extent_node().

Thanks
Yongpeng,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>>
>> Thanks
>> Yongpeng,
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Yongpeng,
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 3fc5d5a182f6 ("f2fs: fix to shrink read extent node in
>>>>>> batches")
>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> index 0ed84cc065a7..87169fd29d89 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> @@ -119,9 +119,10 @@ static bool __may_extent_tree(struct inode
>>>>>> *inode, enum extent_type type)
>>>>>>         if (!__init_may_extent_tree(inode, type))
>>>>>>             return false;
>>>>>>     +    if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> +        return false;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>         if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>> -        if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> -            return false;
>>>>>>             if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_COMPRESSED_FILE) &&
>>>>>>                      !f2fs_sb_has_readonly(F2FS_I_SB(inode)))
>>>>>>                 return false;
>>>>>> @@ -644,6 +645,8 @@ static unsigned int __destroy_extent_node(struct
>>>>>> inode *inode,
>>>>>>           while (atomic_read(&et->node_cnt)) {
>>>>>>             write_lock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> +        if (!is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> +            set_inode_flag(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT);
>>>>>>             node_cnt += __free_extent_tree(sbi, et, nr_shrink);
>>>>>>             write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>> @@ -688,12 +691,12 @@ static void __update_extent_tree_range(struct
>>>>>> inode *inode,
>>>>>>           write_lock(&et->lock);
>>>>>>     -    if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>> -        if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT)) {
>>>>>> -            write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> -            return;
>>>>>> -        }
>>>>>> +    if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT)) {
>>>>>> +        write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> +        return;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>>     +    if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>>             prev = et->largest;
>>>>>>             dei.len = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-21  8:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-03 14:40 [PATCH] f2fs: fix node_cnt race between extent node destroy and writeback Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-13 11:23 ` Chao Yu
2026-04-15 16:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " patchwork-bot+f2fs
2026-04-17  9:00 ` Chao Yu
2026-04-17 13:26   ` [f2fs-dev] " Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-18  0:51     ` Chao Yu
2026-04-18 16:29       ` Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-20  7:28         ` Chao Yu
2026-04-21  8:44           ` Yongpeng Yang [this message]
2026-04-21  9:04             ` Chao Yu
2026-04-21 21:52               ` Jaegeuk Kim

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=252cb446-e313-417b-b780-85dcdcf34a87@sina.com \
    --to=monty_pavel@sina.com \
    --cc=chao@kernel.org \
    --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yangyongpeng@xiaomi.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