All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] btrfs: scrub: Fix RAID56 recovery race condition
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:05:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170330170558.GB8963@lim.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170330063251.16872-3-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:32:48PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> When scrubbing a RAID5 which has recoverable data corruption (only one
> data stripe is corrupted), sometimes scrub will report more csum errors
> than expected. Sometimes even unrecoverable error will be reported.
> 
> The problem can be easily reproduced by the following steps:
> 1) Create a btrfs with RAID5 data profile with 3 devs
> 2) Mount it with nospace_cache or space_cache=v2
>    To avoid extra data space usage.
> 3) Create a 128K file and sync the fs, unmount it
>    Now the 128K file lies at the beginning of the data chunk
> 4) Locate the physical bytenr of data chunk on dev3
>    Dev3 is the 1st data stripe.
> 5) Corrupt the first 64K of the data chunk stripe on dev3
> 6) Mount the fs and scrub it
> 
> The correct csum error number should be 16(assuming using x86_64).
> Larger csum error number can be reported in a 1/3 chance.
> And unrecoverable error can also be reported in a 1/10 chance.
> 
> The root cause of the problem is RAID5/6 recover code has race
> condition, due to the fact that full scrub is initiated per device.
> 
> While for other mirror based profiles, each mirror is independent with
> each other, so race won't cause any big problem.
> 
> For example:
>         Corrupted       |       Correct          |      Correct        |
> |   Scrub dev3 (D1)     |    Scrub dev2 (D2)     |    Scrub dev1(P)    |
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Read out D1             |Read out D2             |Read full stripe     |
> Check csum              |Check csum              |Check parity         |
> Csum mismatch           |Csum match, continue    |Parity mismatch      |
> handle_errored_block    |                        |handle_errored_block |
>  Read out full stripe   |                        | Read out full stripe|
>  D1 csum error(err++)   |                        | D1 csum error(err++)|
>  Recover D1             |                        | Recover D1          |
> 
> So D1's csum error is accounted twice, just because
> handle_errored_block() doesn't have enough protect, and race can happen.
> 
> On even worse case, for example D1's recovery code is re-writing
> D1/D2/P, and P's recovery code is just reading out full stripe, then we
> can cause unrecoverable error.
> 
> This patch will use previously introduced lock_full_stripe() and
> unlock_full_stripe() to protect the whole scrub_handle_errored_block()
> function for RAID56 recovery.
> So no extra csum error nor unrecoverable error.
> 
> Reported-by: Goffredo Baroncelli <kreijack@libero.it>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
> index 5fc99a92b4ff..4bbefc96485d 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
> @@ -1109,6 +1109,7 @@ static int scrub_handle_errored_block(struct scrub_block *sblock_to_check)
>  	int mirror_index;
>  	int page_num;
>  	int success;
> +	bool full_stripe_locked;
>  	static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(_rs, DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_INTERVAL,
>  				      DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_BURST);
>  
> @@ -1134,6 +1135,25 @@ static int scrub_handle_errored_block(struct scrub_block *sblock_to_check)
>  	have_csum = sblock_to_check->pagev[0]->have_csum;
>  	dev = sblock_to_check->pagev[0]->dev;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * For RAID5/6 race can happen for different dev scrub thread.
> +	 * For data corruption, Parity and Data thread will both try
> +	 * to recovery the data.
> +	 * Race can lead to double added csum error, or even unrecoverable
> +	 * error.
> +	 */
> +	ret = lock_full_stripe(fs_info, logical, &full_stripe_locked);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		spin_lock(&sctx->stat_lock);
> +		/* Either malloc failure or bg_cache not found */
> +		if (ret == -ENOMEM)
> +			sctx->stat.malloc_errors++;
> +		else
> +			sctx->stat.uncorrectable_errors++;

Other places in scrub_handle_errored_block() also set read_errors and
uncorrectable_errors, why the above is an exception?

I'm fine with putting a bool into lock_full_stripe(), but it's easier
to tell whether locking is successful by setting the flag after
locking.

Thanks,

-liubo

> +		spin_unlock(&sctx->stat_lock);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
>  	if (sctx->is_dev_replace && !is_metadata && !have_csum) {
>  		sblocks_for_recheck = NULL;
>  		goto nodatasum_case;
> @@ -1468,6 +1488,9 @@ static int scrub_handle_errored_block(struct scrub_block *sblock_to_check)
>  		kfree(sblocks_for_recheck);
>  	}
>  
> +	ret = unlock_full_stripe(fs_info, logical, full_stripe_locked);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		return ret;
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.12.1
> 
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-30 17:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-30  6:32 [PATCH v4 0/5] raid56: scrub related fixes Qu Wenruo
2017-03-30  6:32 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] btrfs: scrub: Introduce full stripe lock for RAID56 Qu Wenruo
2017-03-30 16:49   ` Liu Bo
2017-03-31  1:29     ` Qu Wenruo
2017-03-31 17:34       ` Liu Bo
2017-04-03  0:48         ` Qu Wenruo
2017-03-30  6:32 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] btrfs: scrub: Fix RAID56 recovery race condition Qu Wenruo
2017-03-30 17:05   ` Liu Bo [this message]
2017-03-31  0:25     ` Qu Wenruo
2017-03-31  1:40       ` Qu Wenruo
2017-03-30  6:32 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] btrfs: scrub: Don't append on-disk pages for raid56 scrub Qu Wenruo
2017-03-30  6:32 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] btrfs: Wait flighting bio before freeing target device for raid56 Qu Wenruo
2017-03-30  6:32 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] btrfs: Prevent scrub recheck from racing with dev replace Qu Wenruo

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=20170330170558.GB8963@lim.localdomain \
    --to=bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.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.