Date:   Wed, 8 Mar 2023 17:37:06 +0100
From:   Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH REBASED 0/7] ext4: Cleanup data=journal writeback path
Message-ID: <20230308163706.t5izn75mhoflxa73@quack3>
References: <20230228051319.4085470-1-tytso@mit.edu>
 <20230228135854.ky2zpwal7trz6yg3@quack3>
 <ZACmnwm9in84kbOB@mit.edu>
 <20230303092939.kq4mlowe2y2x6ncx@quack3>
 <20230303103806.77ipbtzz7n5hawim@quack3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230303103806.77ipbtzz7n5hawim@quack3>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri 03-03-23 11:38:06, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 03-03-23 10:29:39, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Thu 02-03-23 08:37:35, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 02:58:54PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Regarding the warning somehow there are dirty pages left after the
> > > > procedures freeze_super() goes through to flush all dirty data. That is not
> > > > too surprising since in data=journal mode pages get (as a surprise to
> > > > freezing code) dirtied when transaction commits. I thought we have this
> > > > covered by jbd2_journal_flush() call in ext4_freeze() but maybe there are
> > > > some stranded PageDirty bits left? It needs more debugging...
> > > 
> > > So the question I have is whether this is a bug that was always there,
> > > or perhaps code changes affected the timing, so that it was much more
> > > likely to happen (although in my testing it's still only triggering
> > > about 50% of the time).
> > > 
> > > This warning can mean that data can be lost, especially if someone was
> > > doing hibernation, right?  We can discuss this at today's ext4 video
> > > conference, but I'm inclined to wait until the next merge cycle for
> > > this patch series until we can figure out what's going on.  Jan, what
> > > do you think?
> > 
> > As we discussed in the meeting, I'll have a look into the failure. For now
> > I'd keep patches on hold as it is not urgent patchset.
> 
> FWIW I'm able to reproduce the issue and also as I'm looking into the
> freeze to it was always there in principle. But my patches likely made it
> much more probable. I'll have a look what I can do...

So in the end this was mostly a cosmetic issue (jbd2 checkpointing code
leaving dirty bits on pages whose buffer heads were already written). Patch
submitted.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR