Re: xfs bug in 2.6.26-rc9

From: Dave Chinner
Date: Mon Jul 14 2008 - 08:13:48 EST


On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 05:34:51PM +1000, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>
>>> That aside, what was the assert failure reported prior to the oops?
>>> i.e. paste the lines in the log before the ---[ cut here ]--- line?
>>> One of them will start with 'Assertion failed:', I think....
>>
>> These ones?
>>
>> Jul 8 04:44:56 via kernel: [554197.888008] Assertion failed: whichfork
>> == XFS_ATTR_FORK || ip->i_delayed_blks == 0, file: fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c,
>> line: 5879
>> Jul 9 03:25:21 via kernel: [42940.748007] Assertion failed: whichfork
>> == XFS_ATTR_FORK || ip->i_delayed_blks == 0, file: fs/xfs/xfs_bmap.c,
>> line: 5879
>
> xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED);
>
> if (whichfork == XFS_DATA_FORK &&
> (ip->i_delayed_blks || ip->i_size > ip->i_d.di_size)) {
> /* xfs_fsize_t last_byte = xfs_file_last_byte(ip); */
> error = xfs_flush_pages(ip, (xfs_off_t)0,
> -1, 0, FI_REMAPF);
> if (error) {
> xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED);
> return error;
> }
> }
>
> ASSERT(whichfork == XFS_ATTR_FORK || ip->i_delayed_blks == 0);
>
> This is a race between xfs_fsr and a mmap write. xfs_fsr acquires the
> iolock and then flushes the file and because it has the iolock it doesn't
> expect any new delayed allocations to occur. A mmap write can allocate
> delayed allocations without acquiring the iolock so is able to get in
> after the flush but before the ASSERT.

Christoph and I were contemplating this problem with ->page_mkwrite
reecently. The problem is that we can't, right now, return an
EAGAIN-like error to ->page_mkwrite() and have it retry the
page fault. Other parts of the page faulting code can do this,
so it seems like a solvable problem.

The basic concept is that if we can return a EAGAIN result we can
try-lock the inode and hold the locks necessary to avoid this race
or prevent the page fault from dirtying the page until the
filesystem is unfrozen.

Added linux-mm to the cc list for discussion.

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/