All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jack@suse.com, hch@infradead.org,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
	sagi@grimberg.me, avi@scylladb.com, axboe@kernel.dk,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, willy@infradead.org,
	Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] nowait aio: return on congested block device
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 08:31:34 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170316213134.GV17542@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170315215107.5628-6-rgoldwyn@suse.de>

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:51:04PM -0500, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
> From: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.com>
> 
> A new flag BIO_NOWAIT is introduced to identify bio's
> orignating from iocb with IOCB_NOWAIT. This flag indicates
> to return immediately if a request cannot be made instead
> of retrying.

So this makes a congested block device run the bio IO completion
callback with an -EAGAIN error present? Are all the filesystem
direct IO submission and completion routines OK with that? i.e. does
such a congestion case cause filesystems to temporarily expose stale
data to unprivileged users when the IO is requeued in this way?

e.g. filesystem does allocation without blocking, submits bio,
device is congested, runs IO completion with error, so nothing
written to allocated blocks, write gets queued, so other read
comes in while the write is queued, reads data from uninitialised
blocks that were allocated during the write....

Seems kinda problematic to me to have a undocumented design
constraint (i.e a landmine) where we submit the AIO only to have it
error out and then expect the filesystem to do something special and
different /without blocking/ on EAGAIN.

Why isn't the congestion check at a higher layer like we do for page
cache readahead? i.e. using the bdi*congested() API at the time we
are doing all the other filesystem blocking checks.

-Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david-FqsqvQoI3Ljby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org>
To: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	jack-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org,
	hch-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org,
	linux-block-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-btrfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-ext4-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-xfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	sagi-NQWnxTmZq1alnMjI0IkVqw@public.gmane.org,
	avi-VrcmuVmyx1hWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org,
	axboe-tSWWG44O7X1aa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org,
	linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	willy-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org,
	Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] nowait aio: return on congested block device
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 08:31:34 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170316213134.GV17542@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170315215107.5628-6-rgoldwyn-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:51:04PM -0500, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
> From: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
> 
> A new flag BIO_NOWAIT is introduced to identify bio's
> orignating from iocb with IOCB_NOWAIT. This flag indicates
> to return immediately if a request cannot be made instead
> of retrying.

So this makes a congested block device run the bio IO completion
callback with an -EAGAIN error present? Are all the filesystem
direct IO submission and completion routines OK with that? i.e. does
such a congestion case cause filesystems to temporarily expose stale
data to unprivileged users when the IO is requeued in this way?

e.g. filesystem does allocation without blocking, submits bio,
device is congested, runs IO completion with error, so nothing
written to allocated blocks, write gets queued, so other read
comes in while the write is queued, reads data from uninitialised
blocks that were allocated during the write....

Seems kinda problematic to me to have a undocumented design
constraint (i.e a landmine) where we submit the AIO only to have it
error out and then expect the filesystem to do something special and
different /without blocking/ on EAGAIN.

Why isn't the congestion check at a higher layer like we do for page
cache readahead? i.e. using the bdi*congested() API at the time we
are doing all the other filesystem blocking checks.

-Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david-FqsqvQoI3Ljby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-03-16 21:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-15 21:50 [PATCH 0/8 v3] No wait AIO Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:50 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 1/8] nowait aio: Introduce IOCB_RW_FLAG_NOWAIT Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 2/8] nowait aio: Return if cannot get hold of i_rwsem Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 3/8] nowait aio: return if direct write will trigger writeback Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-16 13:08   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-16 13:46     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-16 13:20   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-16 13:46     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-16 13:46       ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 4/8] nowait-aio: Introduce IOMAP_NOWAIT Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 5/8] nowait aio: return on congested block device Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-16 14:33   ` Jens Axboe
2017-03-16 14:33     ` Jens Axboe
2017-03-17  2:03     ` Ming Lei
2017-03-17 12:23     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-24 11:32     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-24 11:32       ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-24 14:39       ` Jens Axboe
2017-03-16 21:31   ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2017-03-16 21:31     ` Dave Chinner
2017-03-17 12:23     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-20 17:33       ` Jan Kara
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 6/8] nowait aio: ext4 Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 7/8] nowait aio: xfs Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-15 21:51 ` [PATCH 8/8] nowait aio: btrfs Goldwyn Rodrigues
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-05-09 12:22 [PATCH 0/8 v7] No wait AIO Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-05-09 12:22 ` [PATCH 5/8] nowait aio: return on congested block device Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-05-11  7:44   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-05-11 18:16     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-05-11 18:16       ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-04-14 12:02 [PATCH 0/8 v6] No wait AIO Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-04-14 12:02 ` [PATCH 5/8] nowait aio: return on congested block device Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-04-19  6:45   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-19 15:21     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-04-20 13:43       ` Jan Kara
2017-04-24 21:10     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-04-25  2:28       ` Jens Axboe
2017-04-03 18:52 [PATCH 0/8 v4] No wait AIO Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-04-03 18:53 ` [PATCH 5/8] nowait aio: return on congested block device Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-04-04  6:49   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-28 23:36 [PATCH 0/8 v2] Non-blocking AIO Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-02-28 23:36 ` [PATCH 5/8] nowait aio: return on congested block device Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-08  7:03   ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-03-08 15:00     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-03-08 15:28       ` Jan Kara
2017-03-08 15:51         ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-08 16:17       ` Jens Axboe
2017-03-09  2:18         ` Goldwyn Rodrigues

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=20170316213134.GV17542@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=avi@scylladb.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rgoldwyn@suse.com \
    --cc=rgoldwyn@suse.de \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.