All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Roman Kononov <roman@binarylife.net>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: WARNING in xfs_lwr.c, xfs_write()
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 11:19:07 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100524011907.GC12087@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100523092344.0fcaab42@aaa.pulp.binarylife.net>

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 09:23:44AM -0500, Roman Kononov wrote:
> On 2010-05-23, 20:18:56 +1000, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> > You've got some workload that is mixing direct IO writes with some
> > form of buffered or mmap IO on the same file and they are racing.
> > Mixing different types of IO on the one inode is also known as A
> > Really Bad Idea because there is no guarantee of coherency between
> > them....
> > 
> > Can you find out what the application is triggering this?
> 
> This is severely modified Postgresql, which does mix direct IO with
> buffered one.

I hope you keep plenty of backups, then...

> You say "they are racing". Do you mean that this can cause file system
> corruption?

... because it's Not filesystem corruption you need to be worried
about, it's *silent data corruption* that these races can cause.

> Doest it simply warn that direct user data races with
> buffered user data and one of them wins?

Yes, that's right. No guarantee of who wins is given, though.

> This warning "taints" the kernel.

Yup, the application is doing something dangerous, and this warning
is there to let us know that the data corruption is the user's
fault, not the filesystem...

> Should it be safe to do different types of IOs on different
> non-overlapping 4-KiB-aligned regions of the same file (I am unsure
> if this is what the application really does)?

Yes, it should be safe, but the kernel code can't know whether this
is true or not - there are no specific interlocks with direct IO to
prevent concurrent buffered IO to the same region while a direct IO
is in progress. XFS does best effort attempts to maintain coherency
does not provide any guarantees, hence the warning when known race
conditions are tripped.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Roman Kononov <roman@binarylife.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: WARNING in xfs_lwr.c, xfs_write()
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 11:19:07 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100524011907.GC12087@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100523092344.0fcaab42@aaa.pulp.binarylife.net>

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 09:23:44AM -0500, Roman Kononov wrote:
> On 2010-05-23, 20:18:56 +1000, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> > You've got some workload that is mixing direct IO writes with some
> > form of buffered or mmap IO on the same file and they are racing.
> > Mixing different types of IO on the one inode is also known as A
> > Really Bad Idea because there is no guarantee of coherency between
> > them....
> > 
> > Can you find out what the application is triggering this?
> 
> This is severely modified Postgresql, which does mix direct IO with
> buffered one.

I hope you keep plenty of backups, then...

> You say "they are racing". Do you mean that this can cause file system
> corruption?

... because it's Not filesystem corruption you need to be worried
about, it's *silent data corruption* that these races can cause.

> Doest it simply warn that direct user data races with
> buffered user data and one of them wins?

Yes, that's right. No guarantee of who wins is given, though.

> This warning "taints" the kernel.

Yup, the application is doing something dangerous, and this warning
is there to let us know that the data corruption is the user's
fault, not the filesystem...

> Should it be safe to do different types of IOs on different
> non-overlapping 4-KiB-aligned regions of the same file (I am unsure
> if this is what the application really does)?

Yes, it should be safe, but the kernel code can't know whether this
is true or not - there are no specific interlocks with direct IO to
prevent concurrent buffered IO to the same region while a direct IO
is in progress. XFS does best effort attempts to maintain coherency
does not provide any guarantees, hence the warning when known race
conditions are tripped.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-24  1:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-23  5:20 WARNING in xfs_lwr.c, xfs_write() Roman Kononov
2010-05-23  5:20 ` Roman Kononov
2010-05-23 10:18 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-23 10:18   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-23 14:23   ` Roman Kononov
2010-05-23 14:23     ` Roman Kononov
2010-05-24  1:19     ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2010-05-24  1:19       ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-12  5:00       ` Ilia Mirkin
2010-06-12  5:00         ` Ilia Mirkin
2010-06-13 22:47         ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-13 22:47           ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-13 23:10           ` Ilia Mirkin
2010-06-13 23:10             ` Ilia Mirkin
2010-06-14  1:29             ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-14  1:29               ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-14  3:27               ` Ilia Mirkin
2010-06-14  3:27                 ` Ilia Mirkin
2010-06-14 15:11                 ` Roman Kononov
2010-06-14 15:11                   ` Roman Kononov
2010-05-24  4:12     ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-05-24  5:16       ` Stewart Smith
2010-05-24 19:34       ` Roman Kononov
2010-05-26  7:06         ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 15:07           ` NOW: o_direct -- WAS: " Stan Hoeppner
2010-05-27 11:05             ` Michael Monnerie
2010-05-27 11:47             ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-05-27 13:58               ` Stewart Smith
2010-05-27 14:57                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-05-27 15:45                   ` Stewart Smith
2010-05-28  0:25               ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-05-27 14:05             ` Stewart Smith
2010-05-28  0:42               ` Stan Hoeppner

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=20100524011907.GC12087@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=roman@binarylife.net \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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 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.