linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ju Hyung Park <qkrwngud825@gmail.com>
To: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 13/13] f2fs: don't recovery orphan inode on readonly device
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:04:19 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD14+f2c7yYbc6hu2gWiHfRUrx0SctMZfc0+9HVk+_0UE+Mkug@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a77dc50c-01f0-459b-38de-50f97c129f31@huawei.com>

Thanks for the explanation.

And yes, this patch fixed it, the kernel log is now clean.

Thanks!

[   22.506553] F2FS-fs (loop0): write access unavailable, skipping
orphan cleanup
[   22.506555] F2FS-fs (loop0): recover fsync data on readonly fs
[   22.506556] F2FS-fs (loop0): quota file may be corrupted, skip loading it
[   22.507015] F2FS-fs (loop0): Mounted with checkpoint version = 26e7ba3e

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 5:57 PM Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> On 2019/4/15 16:10, Ju Hyung Park wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks for the fix. I'll try this sooner than later.
> >
> > One minor request though, can you change
> > "JuHyung Park <qkrwngud825@gmail.com>"
> > to
> > "Park Ju Hyung <qkrwngud825@gmail.com>"?
> >
> > That's my preference and I'd like to avoid any inconsistencies.
>
> Sure, will update it in next version. :)
>
> >
> > One additional question from reviewing the code surrounding it:
> > does it really makes sense to cleanup orphan inodes even when the "ro"
> > mount option is passed?
> > It's an explicit request from the user not to write to the block device/image.
>
> Now, f2fs follows the rule that ext4 kept, you can check codes in
> ext4_orphan_cleanup()
>
>         if (bdev_read_only(sb->s_bdev)) {
>                 ext4_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "write access "
>                         "unavailable, skipping orphan cleanup");
>                 return;
>         }
> ...
>         if (s_flags & SB_RDONLY) {
>                 ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "orphan cleanup on readonly fs");
>                 sb->s_flags &= ~SB_RDONLY;
>         }
>
> There are two points in above codes:
> - if block device is readonly, filesystem should not execute any recovery flow
> which can trigger write IO.
> - if filesystem was mounted as readonly one, and recovery is needed, it will
> ignore readonly flag and update data in device for journal recovery during mount.
>
> So IMO, readonly mountoption sematics is only try to restrict data/meta update
> behavior that is triggered by user from mountpoint, but filesystem still can do
> any updates on a writable device if it needs, mostly like recovery flow.
>
> Anyway, if you want to limit any updates on block device, making it readonly
> will be a good choice. :)
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 4:31 PM Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> As JuHyung Park reported in mailing list:
> >>
> >> https://sourceforge.net/p/linux-f2fs/mailman/message/36639787/
> >>
> >> generic_make_request: Trying to write to read-only block-device loop0 (partno 0)
> >> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 23437 at block/blk-core.c:2174 generic_make_request_checks+0x594/0x630
> >>
> >>  generic_make_request+0x46/0x3d0
> >>  submit_bio+0x30/0x110
> >>  __submit_merged_bio+0x68/0x390
> >>  f2fs_submit_page_write+0x1bb/0x7f0
> >>  f2fs_do_write_meta_page+0x7f/0x160
> >>  __f2fs_write_meta_page+0x70/0x140
> >>  f2fs_sync_meta_pages+0x140/0x250
> >>  f2fs_write_checkpoint+0x5c5/0x17b0
> >>  f2fs_sync_fs+0x9c/0x110
> >>  sync_filesystem+0x66/0x80
> >>  f2fs_recover_fsync_data+0x790/0xa30
> >>  f2fs_fill_super+0xe4e/0x1980
> >>  mount_bdev+0x518/0x610
> >>  mount_fs+0x34/0x13f
> >>  vfs_kern_mount.part.11+0x4f/0x120
> >>  do_mount+0x2d1/0xe40
> >>  __x64_sys_mount+0xbf/0xe0
> >>  do_syscall_64+0x4a/0xf0
> >>  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> >>
> >> print_req_error: I/O error, dev loop0, sector 4096
> >>
> >> If block device is readonly, we should never trigger write IO from
> >> filesystem layer, but previously, orphan recovery didn't consider
> >> such condition, result in triggering above warning, fix it.
> >>
> >> Reported-by: JuHyung Park <qkrwngud825@gmail.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c | 6 ++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
> >> index a7ad1b1e5750..90e1bab86269 100644
> >> --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
> >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
> >> @@ -674,6 +674,12 @@ int f2fs_recover_orphan_inodes(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
> >>         if (!is_set_ckpt_flags(sbi, CP_ORPHAN_PRESENT_FLAG))
> >>                 return 0;
> >>
> >> +       if (bdev_read_only(sbi->sb->s_bdev)) {
> >> +               f2fs_msg(sbi->sb, KERN_INFO, "write access "
> >> +                       "unavailable, skipping orphan cleanup");
> >> +               return 0;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >>         if (s_flags & SB_RDONLY) {
> >>                 f2fs_msg(sbi->sb, KERN_INFO, "orphan cleanup on readonly fs");
> >>                 sbi->sb->s_flags &= ~SB_RDONLY;
> >> --
> >> 2.18.0.rc1
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> >> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
> > .
> >

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-15 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-15  7:30 [PATCH 09/13] f2fs: fix to do sanity check on valid node/block count Chao Yu
2019-04-15  7:30 ` [PATCH 10/13] f2fs: fix to do sanity check on valid block count of segment Chao Yu
2019-04-15  7:30 ` [PATCH 11/13] f2fs: fix to avoid panic in f2fs_inplace_write_data() Chao Yu
2019-04-15  7:30 ` [PATCH 12/13] f2fs: fix to set FI_UPDATE_WRITE correctly Chao Yu
2019-04-15  7:30 ` [PATCH 13/13] f2fs: don't recovery orphan inode on readonly device Chao Yu
2019-04-15  8:10   ` [f2fs-dev] " Ju Hyung Park
2019-04-15  8:56     ` Chao Yu
2019-04-15 11:04       ` Ju Hyung Park [this message]
2019-04-15 11:31         ` Chao Yu

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=CAD14+f2c7yYbc6hu2gWiHfRUrx0SctMZfc0+9HVk+_0UE+Mkug@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=qkrwngud825@gmail.com \
    --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yuchao0@huawei.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).