From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748E3C4360C for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 17:31:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A242214D9 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 17:31:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1570383069; bh=+7ukwZYjRuqp0HaB2giqWF8t5YMps7LpkoRS2U8DhoA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=oAAzKJws1Pi3LfY8ixpyU44CslY2p45i+04k47ZZaBY1cYRmjT5iUkzrI0HROeatc sv75uo33nrhpFKjPxomRr6EMQIfzep5u8NRnHV6MCSovejV3kYDBC2NrKA4m849b4o Phfbm+I2ry9crysF0S1j/UjqNyf9w1v/b77vIjgo= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727816AbfJFRbH (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:31:07 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:57174 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726949AbfJFRbF (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Oct 2019 13:31:05 -0400 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8FFE72133F; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 17:31:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1570383065; bh=+7ukwZYjRuqp0HaB2giqWF8t5YMps7LpkoRS2U8DhoA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=To5ys4tHXG7LK/9wekfvLZq65o5Goj+Oa4Pz/HxCd7SOZj2B10eetQGZPShc1mhng U2X4ZTNTOqVa12Wu2JLckHqaGBy1lGJJpKjCM8tHzN/xo4UQ95+Y2SzCEo6Xn2n/xp btHcIDKMkdy+RPTLhP/3jsDviHE2/93UAEe0RkoM= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Changwei Ge , Joseph Qi , Mark Fasheh , Joel Becker , Junxiao Bi , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Sasha Levin Subject: [PATCH 4.19 072/106] ocfs2: wait for recovering done after direct unlock request Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2019 19:21:18 +0200 Message-Id: <20191006171153.744922590@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.23.0 In-Reply-To: <20191006171124.641144086@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20191006171124.641144086@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.66 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Changwei Ge [ Upstream commit 0a3775e4f883912944481cf2ef36eb6383a9cc74 ] There is a scenario causing ocfs2 umount hang when multiple hosts are rebooting at the same time. NODE1 NODE2 NODE3 send unlock requset to NODE2 dies become recovery master recover NODE2 find NODE2 dead mark resource RECOVERING directly remove lock from grant list calculate usage but RECOVERING marked **miss the window of purging clear RECOVERING To reproduce this issue, crash a host and then umount ocfs2 from another node. To solve this, just let unlock progress wait for recovery done. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1550124866-20367-1-git-send-email-gechangwei@live.cn Signed-off-by: Changwei Ge Reviewed-by: Joseph Qi Cc: Mark Fasheh Cc: Joel Becker Cc: Junxiao Bi Cc: Changwei Ge Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c index 63d701cd1e2e7..c8e9b7031d9ad 100644 --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c @@ -105,7 +105,8 @@ static enum dlm_status dlmunlock_common(struct dlm_ctxt *dlm, enum dlm_status status; int actions = 0; int in_use; - u8 owner; + u8 owner; + int recovery_wait = 0; mlog(0, "master_node = %d, valblk = %d\n", master_node, flags & LKM_VALBLK); @@ -208,9 +209,12 @@ static enum dlm_status dlmunlock_common(struct dlm_ctxt *dlm, } if (flags & LKM_CANCEL) lock->cancel_pending = 0; - else - lock->unlock_pending = 0; - + else { + if (!lock->unlock_pending) + recovery_wait = 1; + else + lock->unlock_pending = 0; + } } /* get an extra ref on lock. if we are just switching @@ -244,6 +248,17 @@ leave: spin_unlock(&res->spinlock); wake_up(&res->wq); + if (recovery_wait) { + spin_lock(&res->spinlock); + /* Unlock request will directly succeed after owner dies, + * and the lock is already removed from grant list. We have to + * wait for RECOVERING done or we miss the chance to purge it + * since the removement is much faster than RECOVERING proc. + */ + __dlm_wait_on_lockres_flags(res, DLM_LOCK_RES_RECOVERING); + spin_unlock(&res->spinlock); + } + /* let the caller's final dlm_lock_put handle the actual kfree */ if (actions & DLM_UNLOCK_FREE_LOCK) { /* this should always be coupled with list removal */ -- 2.20.1