Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 15 Oct 2021 13:28:00 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
Cc:     naoya.horiguchi@nec.com, hughd@google.com,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, willy@infradead.org,
        peterx@redhat.com, osalvador@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 0/6] Solve silent data loss caused by poisoned
 page cache (shmem/tmpfs)
Message-Id: <20211015132800.357d891d0b3ad34adb9c7383@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20211014191615.6674-1-shy828301@gmail.com>
References: <20211014191615.6674-1-shy828301@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 12:16:09 -0700 Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> wrote:

> When discussing the patch that splits page cache THP in order to offline the
> poisoned page, Noaya mentioned there is a bigger problem [1] that prevents this
> from working since the page cache page will be truncated if uncorrectable
> errors happen.  By looking this deeper it turns out this approach (truncating
> poisoned page) may incur silent data loss for all non-readonly filesystems if
> the page is dirty.  It may be worse for in-memory filesystem, e.g. shmem/tmpfs
> since the data blocks are actually gone.
> 
> To solve this problem we could keep the poisoned dirty page in page cache then
> notify the users on any later access, e.g. page fault, read/write, etc.  The
> clean page could be truncated as is since they can be reread from disk later on.
> 
> The consequence is the filesystems may find poisoned page and manipulate it as
> healthy page since all the filesystems actually don't check if the page is
> poisoned or not in all the relevant paths except page fault.  In general, we
> need make the filesystems be aware of poisoned page before we could keep the
> poisoned page in page cache in order to solve the data loss problem.

Is the "RFC" still accurate, or might it be an accidental leftover?

I grabbed this series as-is for some testing, but I do think it wouild
be better if it was delivered as two separate series - one series for
the -stable material and one series for the 5.16-rc1 material.