From: Amir Goldstein <email@example.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Eryu Guan <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Test overlayfs readdir cache
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 13:15:05 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxiEx-KcMYdfM9yLygvD5eYgs_58kOvr0NabKqgpB0ybug@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 1:07 PM Miklos Szeredi <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 9:14 AM Amir Goldstein <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Eryu,
> > This extends the generic t_dir_offset2 helper program to verify
> > some cases of missing/stale entries and adds a new generic test which
> > passes on overlayfs (and other fs) on upstream kernel.
> > The overlayfs specific test fails on upstream kernel and the fix commit
> > is currently in linux-next. As usual, you may want to wait with merging
> > until the fix commit hits upstream.
> > Based on feedback from Miklos, I changed the test to check for the
> > missing/stale entries on a new fd, while old fd is kept open, because
> > POSIX allows for stale/missing entries in the old fd.
> > I was looking into another speculated bug in overlayfs which involves
> > multiple calls to getdents. Although it turned out that overlayfs does
> > not have the speculated bug, I left both generic and overlay test with
> > multiple calls to getdents in order to excersize the relevant code.
> > The attached patch was used to verify that the overlayfs test excercises
> > the call to ovl_cache_update_ino() with stale entries.
> > Overlayfs populates the merge dir readdir cache with a list of files in
> > the first getdents call, but updates d_ino of files on the list in
> > subsequent getdents calls. By that time, the last entry is stale and the
> > following warning is printed (on linux-next with patch below applied):
> > [ ] overlayfs: failed to look up (m100) for ino (0)
> > [ ] overlayfs: failed to look up (f100) for ino (0)
> > Miklos,
> > Do you think it is worth the trouble to set p->is_whiteout and skip
> > dir_emit() in this case? and do we need to worry about lookup_one_len()
> > returning -ENOENT in this case?
> So lookup_one_len() first does a cached lookup, and if found returns
> that. If not then it calls the filesystem's ->lookup() callback,
> which in this case is ovl_lookup(). AFAICS ovl_lookup() will never
> return ENOENT, even if the underlying filesystem does.
> Which means it's not necessary to worry about that case.
> The other case you found it that in case of a stale direntry the i_ino
> update will be skipped and so it will return an inconsistent result,
Right. It returns a stale entry with the old real ino.
Not sure if that is an "inconsistent" result.
inconsistent w.r.t what?
> Fixing that looks worthwhile, yes.
Will look into it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-26 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-25 7:14 [PATCH v2 0/5] Test overlayfs readdir cache Amir Goldstein
2021-04-25 7:14 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] src/t_dir_offset2: Add an option to limit of buffer size Amir Goldstein
2021-04-25 7:14 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] src/t_dir_offset2: Add an option to find file by name Amir Goldstein
2021-04-25 7:14 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] src/t_dir_offset2: Add option to create or unlink file Amir Goldstein
2021-04-25 7:14 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] generic: Test readdir of modified directrory Amir Goldstein
2021-04-25 7:14 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] overlay: Test invalidate of readdir cache Amir Goldstein
2021-04-26 10:07 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] Test overlayfs " Miklos Szeredi
2021-04-26 10:15 ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
2021-04-26 13:12 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-04-26 15:22 ` Amir Goldstein
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).