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=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 7263BC43461 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:25:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B8EE2083B for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:25:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=LenovoBeijing.onmicrosoft.com header.i=@LenovoBeijing.onmicrosoft.com header.b="x4T/ZoUH" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3B8EE2083B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=lenovo.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA68213BEDC8B; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 04:24:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=67.219.246.112; helo=mail1.bemta23.messagelabs.com; envelope-from=ahuang12@lenovo.com; receiver= Received: from mail1.bemta23.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta23.messagelabs.com [67.219.246.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14A3C13BEDC7C for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 04:24:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [100.112.7.98] (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits)) by server-1.bemta.az-c.us-east-1.aws.symcld.net id 06/48-04232-882D05F5; Thu, 03 Sep 2020 11:24:56 +0000 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA1VSfUwTZxzu27v2TkLdUcC+dNhhY1ho0kqJupv gYJtxXTYydFu2LJtwldpW2tL0yoQ5E9268tGxYIKy1XRlWkHJDB8jQoWANo6vwjowZRE0UMGQ Mics2jm2qOv1qtv+uTzP73ne555f8sMR4SJfjGsqrRqLiTJI+QmoVrLMl9dMFRVnnzwnIZuOB TBy8PYSSi61ngHk58dnMdLxsAMj7Z0RQM40DHELMJXXeRNTnekPc1WOU49Q1cpAkK9q7w6iqh /8h4v4H/D0JnV5ZQlPN3+zyux9ufKafY53FIwX1IF1uJB4DKDzt2frQEIULwHY7alGWWLjwh5 bCLDkbwD7Jh/yGAKIswhcGHDFyRAKr3qHAEs6AHT8dS9GUKIPgW1r9Qgb4OJC/4NTGEtuARgJ +6IBOM4nZHCii2K6pBD5MPjLBT7jQYifAJwIdnMZIZnQwmMX5zDWpIPNdS6ExTtg4PcmlMlBi c3Q/mMKMxYQJbBmeDS+xkUuHHRfj3nWEbnwQmsG4wHEBvhg7PtYPEKI4MyiO4YhQUBPfwBhcS oMLzyK72kH8PbiJI8VcmGX3x83bYRTbgdg8iFRCMebCtmxDN5pvRLPLINj1ScAizNhz3QgPpf AtvoQ2gBynP+p4YwmIUQWbL+0hR1vgo2OEOaMbZYER79ZRJsB2ga2qy16rc5qpPQGuTI7W65U 5shfkCu3kQrqE/l+RQUt11C0Va5UUIdoBV1l3G8oVZg01i4QPbJSM/ZtL6i5s6rwgTScK00V3 B0qKhauV5eXVukoWldsqTBoaB9Ix3EpFEgmo1qSRaPVVB7QG6Kn+kSGeKI0RaBkZAFtpoy0Xs tKY+BFvCHsOo3g11c80e9V19nTiBA1lZs0YpFgL/OAYB7oKkxP454c/xTYKE4WAA6HI0w0ayx GvfX/+jIQ4UCaLBAyKYl6k/XpX5ejhbjRQuMFhUwhK/WvJD7Ktb1dj4/Vr3CuDK7md86MVO+5 n3P3eLg2B//yV+wz12V0p4af33FDlPFFRF84O/3WWt6eEen844xGQ23ZwL1I7/NpO9r3OV/KE svW7F7eefVh7iDnwHfk9t2KE9rIoWuzaZ7XezfIM5PnioZPvsfpvOEs+SjQUi7ZF5K19KvDVc sF5yZsjbufyTvyqaSswzm/98PxBEUaiWE/9/UpW/KGebmh3q89BVuzYDpPlLprU2bzgMk38kq XW+v/Y/X9Vw/OXQq/+XFtzc6E6YNbmiNyfeZXm33rDTNLgan7RKfZePm87rmkdKFz1xtbj7jb SkffaVq4ta0nKCM55tf+lNhG3vXypCito5QyxEJT/wCwRc8bdwQAAA== X-Env-Sender: ahuang12@lenovo.com X-Msg-Ref: server-33.tower-406.messagelabs.com!1599132294!469490!1 X-Originating-IP: [103.30.234.6] X-SYMC-ESS-Client-Auth: outbound-route-from=pass X-StarScan-Received: X-StarScan-Version: 9.50.3; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 29815 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2020 11:24:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lenovo.com) (103.30.234.6) by server-33.tower-406.messagelabs.com with ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted SMTP; 3 Sep 2020 11:24:56 -0000 Received: from reswpmail01.lenovo.com (unknown [10.62.32.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 29B9AAB646C05F7B7034; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 19:24:51 +0800 (CST) Received: from reswpmail04.lenovo.com (10.62.32.23) by reswpmail01.lenovo.com (10.62.32.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 07:24:50 -0400 Received: from va32wusexedge01.lenovo.com (10.62.123.116) by reswpmail04.lenovo.com (10.62.32.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.1913.5 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 04:24:50 -0700 Received: from APC01-PU1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.126.59) by mail.lenovo.com (10.62.123.116) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 19:24:49 +0800 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=A5VuZgryDhLDX1oOkYJun16Iv2cjaMrgGhXkGniKltylwI/nSiRAab39ZI8GI8sgnUNVDhSlOl58fIxjEF5K2/9h5EZ9HkBa0eUQTQsAx5j/4qLGCHnCr0Gas39kWOrNhh/Q3FbhvBKm8bJvum6TFTRGz3E4Ftp4bykqDP6DX9Bt/jxsG7iAB92vTT5sAC59zKOB6zAGwgcR4M0JL+aT9nrZgm3m90DlRkveBZo5KQrGZDbkJHu8Et0ad1oZFHu+5bcxdEtxRcyup6WDpMlgn2t2frJfxv/eXq3OF3fqvY6KTLtEII6OPb55P1sPlozKpO6MsJqiCbYDbd3DT14WxQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=JnpUsNrnc/c4X6fDxbD9WIvofeLKr92GCYRu2x/d3/M=; b=HY2iCs+C9+UzPItn0gY+RAO9IaDIgWtfoFc3W/HeZui2H7v8kb5DVgKdvWJapUIrdRnmSI7B/T7A/V+iuRfcVLrtivBK8y2umITOcGkFf7hhym8XJ6NfyezFj42fz6whUaNssVPXeRiukJHVfwqc6bJUiiRN2bHYfnLmygfh60Ydp7uuW54KiERMnE54HoW7HKr8eY0Nd86b531dUbAIXeso5sK/A4O9y1oYk+CFe6eX3cGK0PV1RYg896clDGk1UKjxDc1OOoftjvapWSSDJ4CSkq/FC9oslaxvfViMcxGFyx2FQyWCW95FIo8AIxpsvl9bQ7ZLMdMHkqfd+0qQOQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lenovo.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=lenovo.com; dkim=pass header.d=lenovo.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=LenovoBeijing.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-LenovoBeijing-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=JnpUsNrnc/c4X6fDxbD9WIvofeLKr92GCYRu2x/d3/M=; b=x4T/ZoUHEx5c5VYaLaDEdEFWVHo5/DYuQ5gE7SytBh/b5zMdPOkumpHQTxCIUlDuZSxrrvPH2YsEXwnNqJZA97mbwkpWGn43oC+mg2L6RSnesF3dEuu7remRJr5ksKmD33XGqeTDYmpx+ZynMEjzLOM/l+1kB+oUryAATgdmeqU= Received: from HK2PR0302MB2594.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:202:c::8) by HK0PR03MB4674.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com (2603:1096:203:b8::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3348.5; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:24:47 +0000 Received: from HK2PR0302MB2594.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::dc8d:b50c:1dfa:b164]) by HK2PR0302MB2594.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::dc8d:b50c:1dfa:b164%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3370.009; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:24:47 +0000 From: Adrian Huang12 To: Coly Li , Mike Snitzer Subject: RE: [External] Re: flood of "dm-X: error: dax access failed" due to 5.9 commit 231609785cbfb Thread-Topic: [External] Re: flood of "dm-X: error: dax access failed" due to 5.9 commit 231609785cbfb Thread-Index: AQHWgbH62ZFAESTatkSmSEwLQTG/XqlWl28AgAAqtOA= Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:24:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20200902160432.GA5513@redhat.com> <20200902164456.GA5928@redhat.com> <4968af50-663d-74cf-1be2-aaed48a380d5@suse.de> <20200902165101.GB5928@redhat.com>

In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [2001:b011:e002:37e1:4c72:58e5:53e9:1b12] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e040adb6-5525-4330-eed9-08d84ffbf741 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HK0PR03MB4674: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 95bcz0YHPnx6p2CL1BLgHu7A3ThRZhTHb8KzdldW0hDakWVBv80EF39Ts+GGpV9UvRJk3u/G1aYfynwVRg6IeDo35lSkX2wJ4KSdtefJsw3zxFPQys6Dblh3AVYGMs+tqhXYPdW/1ukY6NY1WHrV0k59O/fi/fDiZz95BOr5RQCodvuPb4/Wq4Ex9YmaJQVa5vlncdjxbnqdBZyvE3N13W/OliGBO0IdF1aNQ5pbR9fOYZ4dHirbyBYZ3vUO9RUxa5PdhQCzO56FyC0teDuFJFsJBzQ8hYSSx74tLg9XbRVoWPZhPbXnr3tLnLGF+JGiN+qU1F6xzSUM3aCP8qwVww== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:HK2PR0302MB2594.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFS:(4636009)(346002)(39860400002)(136003)(366004)(396003)(376002)(66946007)(2906002)(86362001)(9686003)(66556008)(316002)(110136005)(54906003)(7696005)(55016002)(66476007)(71200400001)(66446008)(64756008)(8676002)(76116006)(53546011)(4326008)(8936002)(186003)(52536014)(6506007)(83380400001)(5660300002)(478600001)(33656002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HK2PR0302MB2594.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e040adb6-5525-4330-eed9-08d84ffbf741 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 03 Sep 2020 11:24:47.5504 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5c7d0b28-bdf8-410c-aa93-4df372b16203 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: JL+Vq/Y8SUB1f9SXA744qDDN14JeRu/MEt9ACrVJjI9jvgldyXebdMT1cuc5rycSpZxhZlCJXbRue+NEv9wBYQ== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HK0PR03MB4674 X-OriginatorOrg: lenovo.com Message-ID-Hash: OXZTTOGS2ZJK32CMEHW3JHHVT6T2GANE X-Message-ID-Hash: OXZTTOGS2ZJK32CMEHW3JHHVT6T2GANE X-MailFrom: ahuang12@lenovo.com X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation CC: Jan Kara , Pankaj Gupta , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -----Original Message----- > From: Coly Li > Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 4:37 PM > To: Mike Snitzer > Cc: Jan Kara ; Ira Weiny ; Pankaj Gupta > ; Vishal Verma ; > linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org; Adrian Huang12 > Subject: [External] Re: flood of "dm-X: error: dax access failed" due to 5.9 > commit 231609785cbfb > > On 2020/9/3 13:20, Coly Li wrote: > > On 2020/9/3 00:51, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 02 2020 at 12:46pm -0400, Coly Li wrote: > >> > >>> On 2020/9/3 00:44, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Sep 02 2020 at 12:40pm -0400, Coly Li > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 2020/9/3 00:04, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >>>>>> 5.9 commit 231609785cbfb ("dax: print error message by pr_info() > >>>>>> in > >>>>>> __generic_fsdax_supported()") switched from pr_debug() to pr_info(). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The justification in the commit header is really inadequate. If > >>>>>> there is a problem that you need to drill in on, repeat the > >>>>>> testing after enabling the dynamic debugging. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Otherwise, now all DM devices that aren't layered on DAX capable > >>>>>> devices spew really confusing noise to users when they simply > >>>>>> activate their non-DAX DM devices: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [66567.129798] dm-6: error: dax access failed (-5) [66567.134400] > >>>>>> dm-6: error: dax access failed (-5) [66567.139152] dm-6: error: > >>>>>> dax access failed (-5) [66567.314546] dm-2: error: dax access > >>>>>> failed (-95) [66567.319380] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> [66567.324254] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> [66567.479025] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> [66567.483713] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> [66567.488722] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> [66567.494061] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> [66567.498823] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> [66567.503693] dm-2: error: dax access failed (-95) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> commit 231609785cbfb must be reverted. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please advise, thanks. > >>>>> > >>>>> Adrian Huang from Lenovo posted a patch, which titled: dax: do not > >>>>> print error message for non-persistent memory block device > >>>>> > >>>>> It fixes the issue, but no response for now. Maybe we should take this fix. > >>>> > >>>> OK, yes sounds like it. It was merged and is commit > >>>> c2affe920b0e066 > >>>> ("dax: do not print error message for non-persistent memory block > >>>> device") > >>> > >>> Thanks for informing me this patch is merged, I am going to update > >>> my local one :-) > >> > >> So the thing is I'm running v5.9-rc3 (which includes this commit) but > >> I'm still seeing all these warnings when I run the lvm2 testsuite. > >> The reason _seems_ to be because the lvm2 testsuite uses brd devices > >> for test devices. So there is something about the brd device that > >> shows commit c2affe920b0e066 isn't enough :( > > > > [Resend and CC Adrian Huang] > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > Could you please apply and test this attached patch based on v5.9-rc3 ? > > > > It seems the pointer dax_dev of __generic_fsdax_supported() parameter > > is not initialized (IMHO this is not a dm bug), therefore the && > > should be > > || to check the dax support state. > > > > Also I add two pr_info() to print the variables value, let's see > > whether my guess makes sense. > > Also I suggest some kind of change like this in drivers/md/dm.c, > > diff --git a/drivers/md/dm.c b/drivers/md/dm.c index > fb0255d25e4b..566d8208df47 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/dm.c > +++ b/drivers/md/dm.c > @@ -818,6 +818,8 @@ int dm_get_table_device(struct mapped_device *md, > dev_t dev, fmode_t mode, > return -ENOMEM; > } > > + memset(td, 0, sizeof(struct table_device)); > + This does not help. See the following log. ----------------- # lvm2-testsuite --only activate-minor ....... [ 0:00] #activate-minor.sh:22+ aux prepare_vg 2 [ 0:00] ## preparing ramdisk device...ok (/dev/ram0) [ 0:01] 6,3160,150710756,-;brd: module loaded [ 0:01] ## preparing 2 devices...ok [ 0:01] 6,3161,150730864,-;dax_dev: 0000000000000000 [ 0:01] 6,3162,150730866,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 [ 0:01] 6,3163,150730903,-;dax_dev: 0000000000000000 [ 0:01] 6,3164,150730905,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 [ 0:01] 6,3165,150731019,-;dax_dev: 0000000000000000 [ 0:01] 6,3166,150731020,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 [ 0:01] 6,3167,150731512,-;dax_dev: 0000000000000000 [ 0:01] 6,3168,150731514,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 [ 0:01] 6,3169,150731525,-;dax_dev: 0000000000000000 [ 0:01] 6,3170,150731525,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 [ 0:01] 6,3171,150731656,-;dax_dev: 0000000000000000 [ 0:01] 6,3172,150731657,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 ....... [ 0:01] lvchange $vg/foo -a y [ 0:01] #activate-minor.sh:25+ lvchange LVMTEST12302vg/foo -a y [ 0:01] /tmp/LVMTEST12302.W0HGxyzxst/dev/mapper/LVMTEST12302vg-foo not set up by udev: Falling back to direct node creation. [ 0:01] 6,3173,150927070,-;dax_dev: 00000000f0a5865d [ 0:01] 6,3174,150927072,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 [ 0:01] 6,3175,150927081,-;dax_dev: 00000000f0a5865d [ 0:01] 6,3176,150927082,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 [ 0:01] 6,3177,150927241,-;dax_dev: 00000000f0a5865d [ 0:01] 6,3178,150927242,-;bdev_dax_supported(): 0 ---------------- > td->dm_dev.mode = mode; > td->dm_dev.bdev = NULL; > > > The above change may make sure *dax_dev sent into > __generic_fsdax_supported() is always NULL if the target does not support DAX. > But IMHO this is not 100% necessary, it just make > __generic_fsdax_supported() return false faster by the following change in > previous attached patch, > > - if (!dax_dev && !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) { > + if (!dax_dev || !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) { > > I am not very familiar with dm code, CMIIW, just for your information. > > Coly Li -- Adrian _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org