Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:51:54 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
        Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.com>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
        Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>,
        Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>,
        Johannes Thumshirn <jth@kernel.org>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, cluster-devel@redhat.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REPORT] kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inode.c:2620 - page_buffers()
Message-ID: <Yg9QGm2Rygrv+lMj@kroah.com>
References: <Yg0m6IjcNmfaSokM@google.com>
 <82d0f4e4-c911-a245-4701-4712453592d9@nvidia.com>
 <Yg8bxiz02WBGf6qO@mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Yg8bxiz02WBGf6qO@mit.edu>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:08:38PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 05:06:45PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> > Yes. And looking at the pair of backtraces below, this looks very much
> > like another aspect of the "get_user_pages problem" [1], originally
> > described in Jan Kara's 2018 email [2].
> 
> Hmm... I just posted my analysis, which tracks with yours; but I had
> forgotten about Jan's 2018 e-mail on the matter.
> 
> > I'm getting close to posting an RFC for the direct IO conversion to
> > FOLL_PIN, but even after that, various parts of the kernel (reclaim,
> > filesystems/block layer) still need to be changed so as to use
> > page_maybe_dma_pinned() to help avoid this problem. There's a bit
> > more than that, actually.
> 
> The challenge is that fixing this "the right away" is probably not
> something we can backport into an LTS kernel, whether it's 5.15 or
> 5.10... or 4.19.

Don't worry about stable backports to start with.  Do it the "right way"
first and then we can consider if it needs to be backported or not.

thanks,

greg k-h