From: Toshiyuki Okajima Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Re: [BUG] ext4: cannot unfreeze a filesystem due to a deadlock Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 14:09:14 +0900 Message-ID: <4D9BF57A.6030705@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20110215170352.GE4255@thunk.org> <20110215172954.GK17313@quack.suse.cz> <20110216081746.54d146d1.toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110216145627.GB5592@quack.suse.cz> <4D5C9B1B.2050304@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110217104552.GD4947@quack.suse.cz> <20110328170628.ffe314fb.toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110330141205.GC22349@quack.suse.cz> <4D946DAB.3010107@jp.fujitsu.com> <4D9AEE28.4000003@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110405225428.GD8531@quack.suse.cz> Reply-To: toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ted Ts'o , Masayoshi MIZUMA , Andreas Dilger , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, sandeen@redhat.com To: Jan Kara Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110405225428.GD8531@quack.suse.cz> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Hi. (2011/04/06 7:54), Jan Kara wrote: > On Tue 05-04-11 19:25:44, Toshiyuki Okajima wrote: >> (2011/03/31 21:03), Toshiyuki Okajima wrote: >>> Hi, thanks for your reviewing. >>> >>> (2011/03/30 23:12), Jan Kara wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> On Mon 28-03-11 17:06:28, Toshiyuki Okajima wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 11:45:52 +0100 >>>>> Jan Kara wrote: >>>>>> On Thu 17-02-11 12:50:51, Toshiyuki Okajima wrote: >>>>>>> (2011/02/16 23:56), Jan Kara wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed 16-02-11 08:17:46, Toshiyuki Okajima wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:29:54 +0100 >>>>>>>>> Jan Kara wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Tue 15-02-11 12:03:52, Ted Ts'o wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 05:06:30PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: >>> >>>>> I have deeply continued to examined the root cause of this problem, then >>>>> I found it. >>>>> >>>>> It is that we can write a memory which is mmaped to a file. Then the memory >>>>> becomes "DIRTY" so then the flusher thread (ex. wb_do_writeback) tries to >>>>> "writeback" the memory. >>>>> >>>>> Therefore, the root cause of this hangup is not only ext4 component (with >>>>> delayed allocation feature) but also writeback mechanism for mmap. If you >>>>> use the other filesystem, you can write something to the filesystem though >>>>> you have freezed the filesystem. >>> >>>> Well, you can write something only in the caches, not to the on disk >>>> image. So it's not a problem as such. >>> My reproducer uses the loopback device(/dev/loopX). By using it, I have confirmed that >>> we can write in not only the caches but also the loopback device. However, >>> I don't still confirm that we can write to the real device(/dev/sdaX). >>> >>>> >>>>> A sample problem is attached on this mail. Try to execute it then you can >>>>> confirm that we can write some data to your filesystem while freezing the >>>>> filesystem. >>>>> (If you change FS variable in go.sh from ext3 to ext4 and you execute >>>>> "fsfreeze -u mnt" manually on other prompt, you can also confirm this deadlock.) >>>>> >>>>> I think the best approach to fix this problem is to let users not to write >>>>> memory which is mapped to a certain file while the filesystem is freezing. >>>>> However, it is very difficult to control users not to write memory which has >>>>> been already mapped to the file. >>>> It is actually possible. In case of ext4, you could add a check (+ wait) >>>> in ext4_page_mkwrite() whether the filesystem is frozen or in the process >>>> of being frozen and if so, wait for it to get unfrozen. The only tough >>>> problem here might be the locking as ext4_page_mkwrite() is called with >>>> mmap_sem held and I'm not sure we can take s_umount with mmap_sem held. >>>> But you'd have to fix all filesystems (and all paths possibly creating >>>> dirty data) in this way. >>>> >>> >>>>> Therefore, I think there is only actual method that we stop writeback thread >>>>> to resolve the mmap problem. Also, by this fix, the original problem >>>>> (ext4 delayed write vs unfreeze) can be solved. >>>> Hmm, I had a look at the code again and think we could fix the issue >>>> cleanly (i.e. all possible users of s_umount) as follows: The lock >>>> ordering will be >>>> s_umount -> "fs frozen" >>>> and there will be a new mutex s_freeze_mutex protecting changes of >>>> s_frozen. >>>> >>>> freeze_bdev() already observes this lock ordering, it will only take >>>> s_freeze_mutex for the changes of s_frozen values. The only other code >>>> that is relevant for the lock ordering is thaw_super() (the freezing >>>> process is not expected to reenter kernel for the frozen filesystem). >>>> In thaw_super() we could take s_freeze_mutex, do all the thawing work, >>>> set s_frozen, release s_freeze_mutex and put superblock reference. >>>> >>> >>>> So something like the patch below - it seems to work for me, can you test >>>> it please? >>> I think your patch looks good, so, the original problem seems to be solved. >>> OK, I will test your patch. >>> This weekend I cannot test it. So, I will reply next week. >> I have tested whether Mizuma-san's reproducer can cause to deadlock with your >> patch. And then any problems didn't hit while the reproducer was running. >> >> I think your patch solves the original deadlock problem which is reported by >> Mizuma-san. > Good. Thanks. > >>> Reported-by: Toshiyuki Okajima >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara >>> --- >>> fs/super.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ >>> include/linux/fs.h | 1 + >>> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> However, I think a write which causes the deadlock is from mmapped dirty >> pages. So, I guess we also need to fix in the mmap path while fsfreezing. > Why? If you dirty a page, writeback thread can come and try to write it - > which blocks - but now that does not matter... I have not understood the code around writeback thread very much... Please explain me the concrete function name which blocks some writes? Mizuma-san's reproducer also writes the data which maps to the file (mmap). The original problem happens after the fsfreeze operation is done. I understand the normal write operation (not mmap) can be blocked while fsfreezing. So, I guess we don't always block all the write operation while fsfreezing. Thanks Toshiyuki Okajima