lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: avoid deadlock caused by lock order of page and lock_op
On 06/26, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Jaegeuk,
>
> On 2017/6/26 22:54, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > Hi Chao,
> >
> > On 06/26, Chao Yu wrote:
> >> Hi Jaegeuk,
> >>
> >> On 2017/6/25 0:25, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> >>> - punch_hole
> >>> - fill_zero
> >>> - f2fs_lock_op
> >>> - get_new_data_page
> >>> - lock_page
> >>>
> >>> - f2fs_write_data_pages
> >>> - lock_page
> >>> - do_write_data_page
> >>> - f2fs_lock_op
> >>
> >> Good catch!
> >>
> >> With this implementation, page writeback can fail due to concurrent checkpoint,
> >> this will make fsync/atomic_commit which trigger synchronous write failed randomly.
> >>
> >> How about unifying the lock order in punch_hole as one in writepages for regular
> >> inode? We can add one more parameter in get_new_data_page to indicate whether
> >> callee needs to lock cp_rwsem.
> >
> > Currently, there would be some places to keep cp_rwsem -> page.lock, which seems
> > not simple to change the lock order with page.lock -> cp_rwsem. IMO, we can retry
> > flushing data in f2fs_sync_file, once it gets -EAGAIN.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
>
> What about adding inode_lock in f2fs_sync_file to exclude other
> foreground operation which have reversed lock order? Atomic_commit is OK
> since it has inode_lock in its path.

I have concerned about performance regression, if we do that.

>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
> >>> ---
> >>> fs/f2fs/data.c | 5 +++--
> >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>> index 7d3af48d34a9..9141bd19a902 100644
> >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>> @@ -1404,8 +1404,9 @@ int do_write_data_page(struct f2fs_io_info *fio)
> >>> }
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> - if (fio->need_lock == LOCK_REQ)
> >>> - f2fs_lock_op(fio->sbi);
> >>> + /* Deadlock due to between page->lock and f2fs_lock_op */
> >>> + if (fio->need_lock == LOCK_REQ && !f2fs_trylock_op(fio->sbi))
> >>> + return -EAGAIN;
> >>>
> >>> err = get_dnode_of_data(&dn, page->index, LOOKUP_NODE);
> >>> if (err)
> >>>
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
> >

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-01 09:29    [W:0.612 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site