linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
To: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>,
	dsterba@suse.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] btrfs: qgroup rescan races (part 1)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 18:27:06 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea3cabf7-584a-4ec3-3baf-845aa1f83351@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b12bde4d-babe-8d2f-1ae8-86e3e9fddbc3@suse.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3437 bytes --]

On 5/3/18 2:23 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> 
> 
> On  3.05.2018 00:11, jeffm@suse.com wrote:
>> From: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
>>
>> Hi Dave -
>>
>> Here's the updated patchset for the rescan races.  This fixes the issue
>> where we'd try to start multiple workers.  It introduces a new "ready"
>> bool that we set during initialization and clear while queuing the worker.
>> The queuer is also now responsible for most of the initialization.
>>
>> I have a separate patch set start that gets rid of the racy mess surrounding
>> the rescan worker startup.  We can handle it in btrfs_run_qgroups and
>> just set a flag to start it everywhere else.
> I'd be interested in seeing those patches. Some time ago I did send a
> patch which cleaned up the way qgroup rescan was initiated. It was done
> from "btrfs_run_qgroups" and I think this is messy. Whatever we do we
> ought to really have well-defined semantics when qgroups rescan are run,
> preferably we shouldn't be conflating rescan + run (unless there is
> _really_ good reason to do). In the past the rescan from scan was used
> only during qgroup enabling.

I think btrfs_run_qgroups is the place to do it.  Here's why:

2773 int
2774 btrfs_qgroup_rescan(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
2775 {
2776         int ret = 0;
2777         struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
2778
2779         ret = qgroup_rescan_init(fs_info, 0, 1);
2780         if (ret)
2781                 return ret;
2782
2783         /*
2784          * We have set the rescan_progress to 0, which means no more
2785          * delayed refs will be accounted by btrfs_qgroup_account_ref.
2786          * However, btrfs_qgroup_account_ref may be right after its call
2787          * to btrfs_find_all_roots, in which case it would still do the
2788          * accounting.
2789          * To solve this, we're committing the transaction, which will
2790          * ensure we run all delayed refs and only after that, we are
2791          * going to clear all tracking information for a clean start.
2792          */
2793
2794         trans = btrfs_join_transaction(fs_info->fs_root);
2795         if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
2796                 fs_info->qgroup_flags &= ~BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN;
2797                 return PTR_ERR(trans);
2798         }
2799         ret = btrfs_commit_transaction(trans);
2800         if (ret) {
2801                 fs_info->qgroup_flags &= ~BTRFS_QGROUP_STATUS_FLAG_RESCAN;
2802                 return ret;
2803         }
2804
2805         qgroup_rescan_zero_tracking(fs_info);
2806
2807         queue_rescan_worker(fs_info);
2808         return 0;
2809 }

The delayed ref race should exist anywhere we initiate a rescan outside of
initially enabling qgroups.  We already zero the tracking and queue the rescan
worker in btrfs_run_qgroups for when we enable qgroups.  Why not just always
queue the worker there so the initialization and execution has a clear starting point?

There are a few other races I'd like to fix as well.  We call btrfs_run_qgroups
directly from btrfs_ioctl_qgroup_assign, which is buggy since
btrfs_add_qgroup_relation only checks to see if the quota_root exists.  It will
exist as soon as btrfs_quota_enable runs but we won't have committed the
transaction yet.  The call will end up enabling quotas in the middle of a transaction.

-Jeff

-- 
Jeff Mahoney
SUSE Labs


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-03 22:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-02 21:11 [PATCH v3 0/3] btrfs: qgroup rescan races (part 1) jeffm
2018-05-02 21:11 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: qgroups, fix rescan worker running races jeffm
2018-05-03  7:24   ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-05-03 13:39     ` Jeff Mahoney
2018-05-03 15:52       ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-05-03 15:57         ` Jeff Mahoney
2018-05-10 19:49   ` Jeff Mahoney
2018-05-10 23:04   ` Jeff Mahoney
2020-01-16  6:41   ` Qu Wenruo
2018-05-02 21:11 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: qgroups, remove unnecessary memset before btrfs_init_work jeffm
2018-05-02 21:11 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: qgroup, don't try to insert status item after ENOMEM in rescan worker jeffm
2018-05-03  6:23 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] btrfs: qgroup rescan races (part 1) Nikolay Borisov
2018-05-03 22:27   ` Jeff Mahoney [this message]
2018-05-04  5:59     ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-05-04 13:32       ` Jeff Mahoney
2018-05-04 13:41         ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-28  3:28 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-12-03 19:32   ` David Sterba

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=ea3cabf7-584a-4ec3-3baf-845aa1f83351@suse.com \
    --to=jeffm@suse.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nborisov@suse.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).