Skip to content

L
linux

xiphi1978 / linux

通知 2
Star 0
Fork 0
L
linux

体验新版 GitCode，发现更多精彩内容 >>

切换分支/标签
  1. 19 10月, 2013 1 次提交
  3. 11 10月, 2013 4 次提交
    • M
      Btrfs: fix oops caused by the space balance and dead roots · c00869f1
      由 Miao Xie 提交于 
      When doing space balance and subvolume destroy at the same time, we met
the following oops:

kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/relocation.c:2247!
RIP: 0010: [<ffffffffa04cec16>] prepare_to_merge+0x154/0x1f0 [btrfs]
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffffa04b5ab7>] relocate_block_group+0x466/0x4e6 [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa04b5c7a>] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x143/0x275 [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa0495c56>] btrfs_relocate_chunk.isra.27+0x5c/0x5a2 [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa0459871>] ? btrfs_item_key_to_cpu+0x15/0x31 [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa048b46a>] ? btrfs_get_token_64+0x7e/0xcd [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa04a3467>] ? btrfs_tree_read_unlock_blocking+0xb2/0xb7 [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa049907d>] btrfs_balance+0x9c7/0xb6f [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa049ef84>] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x234/0x2ac [btrfs]
 [<ffffffffa04a1e8e>] btrfs_ioctl+0xd87/0x1ef9 [btrfs]
 [<ffffffff81122f53>] ? path_openat+0x234/0x4db
 [<ffffffff813c3b78>] ? __do_page_fault+0x31d/0x391
 [<ffffffff810f8ab6>] ? vma_link+0x74/0x94
 [<ffffffff811250f5>] vfs_ioctl+0x1d/0x39
 [<ffffffff811258c8>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x32d/0x3e2
 [<ffffffff811259d4>] SyS_ioctl+0x57/0x83
 [<ffffffff813c3bfa>] ? do_page_fault+0xe/0x10
 [<ffffffff813c73c2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

It is because we returned the error number if the reference of the root was 0
when doing space relocation. It was not right here, because though the root
was dead(refs == 0), but the space it held still need be relocated, or we
could not remove the block group. So in this case, we should return the root
no matter it is dead or not.
Signed-off-by: NMiao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
      c00869f1
    • M
      Btrfs: insert orphan roots into fs radix tree · 14927d95
      由 Miao Xie 提交于 
      Now we don't drop all the deleted snapshots/subvolumes before the space
balance. It means we have to relocate the space which is held by the dead
snapshots/subvolumes. So we must into them into fs radix tree, or we would
forget to commit the change of them when doing transaction commit, and it
would corrupt the metadata.
Signed-off-by: NMiao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
      14927d95
    • J
      Btrfs: limit delalloc pages outside of find_delalloc_range · 7bf811a5
      由 Josef Bacik 提交于 
      Liu fixed part of this problem and unfortunately I steered him in slightly the
wrong direction and so didn't completely fix the problem.  The problem is we
limit the size of the delalloc range we are looking for to max bytes and then we
try to lock that range.  If we fail to lock the pages in that range we will
shrink the max bytes to a single page and re loop.  However if our first page is
inside of the delalloc range then we will end up limiting the end of the range
to a period before our first page.  This is illustrated below

[0 -------- delalloc range --------- 256mb]
                                  [page]

So find_delalloc_range will return with delalloc_start as 0 and end as 128mb,
and then we will notice that delalloc_start < *start and adjust it up, but not
adjust delalloc_end up, so things go sideways.  To fix this we need to not limit
the max bytes in find_delalloc_range, but in find_lock_delalloc_range and that
way we don't end up with this confusion.  Thanks,
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
      7bf811a5
    • J
      Btrfs: use right root when checking for hash collision · 4871c158
      由 Josef Bacik 提交于 
      btrfs_rename was using the root of the old dir instead of the root of the new
dir when checking for a hash collision, so if you tried to move a file into a
subvol it would freak out because it would see the file you are trying to move
in its current root.  This fixes the bug where this would fail

btrfs subvol create test1
btrfs subvol create test2
mv test1 test2.

Thanks to Chris Murphy for catching this,

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reported-by: NChris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
      4871c158
  5. 05 10月, 2013 4 次提交
    • I
      Btrfs: fix a use-after-free bug in btrfs_dev_replace_finishing · 1357272f
      由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于 
      free_device rcu callback, scheduled from btrfs_rm_dev_replace_srcdev,
can be processed before btrfs_scratch_superblock is called, which would
result in a use-after-free on btrfs_device contents.  Fix this by
zeroing the superblock before the rcu callback is registered.

Cc: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de>
Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
      1357272f
    • I
      Btrfs: eliminate races in worker stopping code · 964fb15a
      由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于 
      The current implementation of worker threads in Btrfs has races in
worker stopping code, which cause all kinds of panics and lockups when
running btrfs/011 xfstest in a loop.  The problem is that
btrfs_stop_workers is unsynchronized with respect to check_idle_worker,
check_busy_worker and __btrfs_start_workers.

E.g., check_idle_worker race flow:

       btrfs_stop_workers():            check_idle_worker(aworker):
- grabs the lock
- splices the idle list into the
  working list
- removes the first worker from the
  working list
- releases the lock to wait for
  its kthread's completion
                                  - grabs the lock
                                  - if aworker is on the working list,
                                    moves aworker from the working list
                                    to the idle list
                                  - releases the lock
- grabs the lock
- puts the worker
- removes the second worker from the
  working list
                              ......
        btrfs_stop_workers returns, aworker is on the idle list
                 FS is umounted, memory is freed
                              ......
              aworker is waken up, fireworks ensue

With this applied, I wasn't able to trigger the problem in 48 hours,
whereas previously I could reliably reproduce at least one of these
races within an hour.
Reported-by: NDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
      964fb15a
    • L
      Btrfs: fix crash of compressed writes · 385fe0be
      由 Liu Bo 提交于 
      The crash[1] is found by xfstests/generic/208 with "-o compress",
it's not reproduced everytime, but it does panic.

The bug is quite interesting, it's actually introduced by a recent commit
(573aecaf,
Btrfs: actually limit the size of delalloc range).

Btrfs implements delay allocation, so during writeback, we
(1) get a page A and lock it
(2) search the state tree for delalloc bytes and lock all pages within the range
(3) process the delalloc range, including find disk space and create
    ordered extent and so on.
(4) submit the page A.

It runs well in normal cases, but if we're in a racy case, eg.
buffered compressed writes and aio-dio writes,
sometimes we may fail to lock all pages in the 'delalloc' range,
in which case, we need to fall back to search the state tree again with
a smaller range limit(max_bytes = PAGE_CACHE_SIZE - offset).

The mentioned commit has a side effect, that is, in the fallback case,
we can find delalloc bytes before the index of the page we already have locked,
so we're in the case of (delalloc_end <= *start) and return with (found > 0).

This ends with not locking delalloc pages but making ->writepage still
process them, and the crash happens.

This fixes it by just thinking that we find nothing and returning to caller
as the caller knows how to deal with it properly.

[1]:
------------[ cut here ]------------
kernel BUG at mm/page-writeback.c:2170!
[...]
CPU: 2 PID: 11755 Comm: btrfs-delalloc- Tainted: G           O 3.11.0+ #8
[...]
RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff810f5093>]  [<ffffffff810f5093>] clear_page_dirty_for_io+0x1e/0x83
[...]
[ 4934.248731] Stack:
[ 4934.248731]  ffff8801477e5dc8 ffffea00049b9f00 ffff8801869f9ce8 ffffffffa02b841a
[ 4934.248731]  0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000fff 0000000000000620
[ 4934.248731]  ffff88018db59c78 ffffea0005da8d40 ffffffffa02ff860 00000001810016c0
[ 4934.248731] Call Trace:
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffffa02b841a>] extent_range_clear_dirty_for_io+0xcf/0xf5 [btrfs]
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffffa02a8889>] compress_file_range+0x1dc/0x4cb [btrfs]
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffff8104f7af>] ? detach_if_pending+0x22/0x4b
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffffa02a8bad>] async_cow_start+0x35/0x53 [btrfs]
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffffa02c694b>] worker_loop+0x14b/0x48c [btrfs]
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffffa02c6800>] ? btrfs_queue_worker+0x25c/0x25c [btrfs]
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffff810608f5>] kthread+0x8d/0x95
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffff81060868>] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x43/0x43
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffff814fe09c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
[ 4934.248731]  [<ffffffff81060868>] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x43/0x43
[ 4934.248731] Code: ff 85 c0 0f 94 c0 0f b6 c0 59 5b 5d c3 0f 1f 44 00 00 55 48 89 e5 41 54 53 48 89 fb e8 2c de 00 00 49 89 c4 48 8b 03 a8 01 75 02 <0f> 0b 4d 85 e4 74 52 49 8b 84 24 80 00 00 00 f6 40 20 01 75 44
[ 4934.248731] RIP  [<ffffffff810f5093>] clear_page_dirty_for_io+0x1e/0x83
[ 4934.248731]  RSP <ffff8801869f9c48>
[ 4934.280307] ---[ end trace 36f06d3f8750236a ]---
Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
      385fe0be
    • J
      Btrfs: fix transid verify errors when recovering log tree · 60e7cd3a
      由 Josef Bacik 提交于 
      If we crash with a log, remount and recover that log, and then crash before we
can commit another transaction we will get transid verify errors on the next
mount.  This is because we were not zero'ing out the log when we committed the
transaction after recovery.  This is ok as long as we commit another transaction
at some point in the future, but if you abort or something else goes wrong you
can end up in this weird state because the recovery stuff says that the tree log
should have a generation+1 of the super generation, which won't be the case of
the transaction that was started for recovery.  Fix this by removing the check
and _always_ zero out the log portion of the super when we commit a transaction.
This fixes the transid verify issues I was seeing with my force errors tests.
Thanks,
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
      60e7cd3a
  7. 21 9月, 2013 26 次提交
  9. 03 9月, 2013 4 次提交
  11. 01 9月, 2013 1 次提交
    • F
      Btrfs: optimize key searches in btrfs_search_slot · d7396f07
      由 Filipe David Borba Manana 提交于 
      When the binary search returns 0 (exact match), the target key
will necessarily be at slot 0 of all nodes below the current one,
so in this case the binary search is not needed because it will
always return 0, and we waste time doing it, holding node locks
for longer than necessary, etc.

Below follow histograms with the times spent on the current approach of
doing a binary search when the previous binary search returned 0, and
times for the new approach, which directly picks the first item/child
node in the leaf/node.

Current approach:

Count: 6682
Range: 35.000 - 8370.000; Mean: 85.837; Median: 75.000; Stddev: 106.429
Percentiles:  90th: 124.000; 95th: 145.000; 99th: 206.000
  35.000 -   61.080:  1235 ################
  61.080 -  106.053:  4207 #####################################################
 106.053 -  183.606:  1122 ##############
 183.606 -  317.341:   111 #
 317.341 -  547.959:     6 |
 547.959 - 8370.000:     1 |

Approach proposed by this patch:

Count: 6682
Range:  6.000 - 135.000; Mean: 16.690; Median: 16.000; Stddev:  7.160
Percentiles:  90th: 23.000; 95th: 27.000; 99th: 40.000
   6.000 -    8.418:    58 #
   8.418 -   11.670:  1149 #########################
  11.670 -   16.046:  2418 #####################################################
  16.046 -   21.934:  2098 ##############################################
  21.934 -   29.854:   744 ################
  29.854 -   40.511:   154 ###
  40.511 -   54.848:    41 #
  54.848 -   74.136:     5 |
  74.136 -  100.087:     9 |
 100.087 -  135.000:     6 |

These samples were captured during a run of the btrfs tests 001, 002 and
004 in the xfstests, with a leaf/node size of 4Kb.
Signed-off-by: NFilipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
      d7396f07