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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 ADCFBC38A24 for ; Thu, 7 May 2020 06:39:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E9420753 for ; Thu, 7 May 2020 06:39:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726393AbgEGGjt (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2020 02:39:49 -0400 Received: from szxga06-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.32]:54972 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725763AbgEGGjt (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2020 02:39:49 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS404-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id EAF86B5CC73187F0CE21; Thu, 7 May 2020 14:38:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Thu, 7 May 2020 14:38:43 +0800 Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: get parent inode when recovering pino To: Gao Xiang , Eric Biggers CC: Jaegeuk Kim , , , References: <20200505153139.201697-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <20200505165847.GA98848@gmail.com> <20200505181323.GA55221@google.com> <20200505181941.GC98848@gmail.com> <20200506001403.GA2101@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> <20200506012428.GG128280@sol.localdomain> <20200506015813.GA9256@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> <20200506064709.GA25482@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> <20200506191613.GB842@sol.localdomain> <20200506223623.GA27760@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: <3a837113-8081-6f01-4d8d-1d4b6600ec8c@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 14:38:39 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200506223623.GA27760@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020/5/7 6:36, Gao Xiang wrote: > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 12:16:13PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: >> On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 02:47:19PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: >>> On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 09:58:22AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: >>>> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 06:24:28PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: >>>>> On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 08:14:07AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Actually, I think this is wrong because the fsync can be done via a file >>>>>>> descriptor that was opened to a now-deleted link to the file. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm still confused about this... >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't know what's wrong with this version from my limited knowledge? >>>>>> inode itself is locked when fsyncing, so >>>>>> >>>>>> if the fsync inode->i_nlink == 1, this inode has only one hard link >>>>>> (not deleted yet) and should belong to a single directory; and >>>>>> >>>>>> the only one parent directory would not go away (not deleted as well) >>>>>> since there are some dirents in it (not empty). >>>>>> >>>>>> Could kindly explain more so I would learn more about this scenario? >>>>>> Thanks a lot! >>>>> >>>>> i_nlink == 1 just means that there is one non-deleted link. There can be links >>>>> that have since been deleted, and file descriptors can still be open to them. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your inspiration. You are right, thanks. >>>> >>>> Correct my words... I didn't check f2fs code just now, it seems f2fs doesn't >>>> take inode_lock as some other fs like __generic_file_fsync or ubifs_fsync. >>>> >>>> And i_sem locks nlink / try_to_fix_pino similarly in some extent. It seems >>>> no race by using d_find_alias here. Thanks again. >>>> >>> >>> (think more little bit just now...) >>> >>> Thread 1: Thread 2 (fsync): >>> vfs_unlink try_to_fix_pino >>> f2fs_unlink >>> f2fs_delete_entry >>> f2fs_drop_nlink (i_sem, inode->i_nlink = 1) >>> >>> (... but this dentry still hashed) i_sem, check inode->i_nlink = 1 >>> i_sem d_find_alias >>> >>> d_delete >>> >>> I'm not sure if fsync could still use some wrong alias by chance.. >>> completely untested, maybe just noise... Another race condition could be: Thread 1 (fsync) Thread 2 (rename) - f2fs_sync_fs - try_to_fix_pino - f2fs_rename - down_write - file_lost_pino - up_write - down_write - file_got_pino - up_write Thanks, >>> >> >> Right, good observation. My patch makes it better, but it's still broken. >> >> I don't know how to fix it. If we see i_nlink == 1 and multiple hashed >> dentries, there doesn't appear to be a way to distingush which one corresponds >> to the remaining link on-disk (if any; it may not even be in the dcache), and >> which correspond to links that vfs_unlink() has deleted from disk but hasn't yet >> done d_delete() on. >> >> One idea would be choose one, then take inode_lock_shared(dir) and do >> __f2fs_find_entry() to check if the dentry is really still on-disk. That's >> heavyweight and error-prone though, and the locking could cause problems. >> >> I'm wondering though, does f2fs really need try_to_fix_pino() at all, and did it >> ever really work? It never actually updates the f2fs_inode::i_name to match the >> new directory. So independently of this bug with deleted links, I don't see how >> it can possibly work as intended. > > Part of my humble opinion would be "update pino in rename/unlink/link... such ops > instead of in fsync" (maybe it makes better sense of locking)... But actually I'm > not a f2fs folk now, just curious about what the original patch resolved with > these new extra igrab/iput (as I said before, I could not find some clue previously). > > Thanks, > Gao Xiang > >> >> - Eric > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel > . >