Btrfs: fix leaking of ordered extents after direct IO write error
PATCH 1/1 Btrfs: fix leaking of ordered extents after direct IO write error
From: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
When doing a direct IO write, __blockdev_direct_IO() can call the btrfs_get_blocks_direct() callback one or more times before it calls the btrfs_submit_direct() callback. However it can fail after calling the first callback and before calling the second callback, which is a problem because the first one creates ordered extents and the second one is the one that submits bios that cover the ordered extents created by the first one. That means the ordered extents will never complete nor have any of the flags BTRFS_ORDERED_IO_DONE / BTRFS_ORDERED_IOERR set, resulting in subsequent operations (such as other direct IO writes, buffered writes or hole punching) that lock the same IO range and lookup for ordered extents in the range to hang forever waiting for those ordered extents because they can not complete ever, since no bio was submitted.
Fix this by tracking a range of created ordered extents that don't have yet corresponding bios submitted and completing the ordered extents in the range if __blockdev_direct_IO() fails with an error.
---
It applies on top of a patch sent a couple weeks ago with the title:
"Btrfs: fix error path when failing to submit bio for direct IO write"
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
fs/btrfs/inode.c +38 -5
@@ -66,6 +66,13 @@ struct btrfs_iget_args {struct btrfs_root *root; }; +struct btrfs_dio_data { +u64 outstanding_extents; +u64 reserve; +u64 unsubmitted_oe_range_start; +u64 unsubmitted_oe_range_end; +}; +static const struct inode_operations btrfs_dir_inode_operations;static const struct inode_operations btrfs_symlink_inode_operations;static const struct inode_operations btrfs_dir_ro_inode_operations;
@@ -7481,11 +7488,6 @@ static struct extent_map *create_pinned_em(struct inode *inode, u64 start,return em; } -struct btrfs_dio_data { -u64 outstanding_extents; -u64 reserve; -}; -static void adjust_dio_outstanding_extents (struct inode *inode,struct btrfs_dio_data *dio_data,const u64 len)
@@ -7669,6 +7671,7 @@ unlock:btrfs_free_reserved_data_space (inode, start, len);WARN_ON (dio_data->reserve < len); dio_data->reserve -= len; + dio_data->unsubmitted_oe_range_end = start + len; current->journal_info = dio_data; }
@@ -8342,6 +8345,21 @@ static void btrfs_submit_direct(int rw, struct bio *dio_bio, dip->subio_endio = btrfs_subio_endio_read; } +/* +* Reset the range for unsubmitted ordered extents (to a 0 length range) +* even if we fail to submit a bio, because in such case we do the +* corresponding error handling below and it must not be done a second +* time by btrfs_direct_IO(). +*/ +if (write) { +struct btrfs_dio_data *dio_data = current->journal_info; + + dio_data->unsubmitted_oe_range_end = dip->logical_offset + + dip->bytes; + dio_data->unsubmitted_oe_range_start = + dio_data->unsubmitted_oe_range_end; + } + ret =btrfs_submit_direct_hook (rw, dip, skip_sum);if (!ret)return ;
@@ -8478,6 +8496,8 @@ static ssize_t btrfs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,* originally calculated. Abuse current->journal_info for this. */ dio_data.reserve =round_up (count, root->sectorsize); + dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start = (u64 )offset; + dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_end = (u64 )offset; current->journal_info = &dio_data; }else if (test_bit (BTRFS_INODE_READDIO_NEED_LOCK , &BTRFS_I (inode)->runtime_flags)) {
@@ -8496,6 +8516,19 @@ static ssize_t btrfs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,if (dio_data.reserve)btrfs_delalloc_release_space (inode, offset, dio_data.reserve); +/* +* On error we might have left some ordered extents +* without submitting corresponding bios for them, so +* cleanup them up to avoid other tasks getting them +* and waiting for them to complete forever. +*/ +if (dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start < + dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_end) +btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered (inode, + dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start, + dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_end - + dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start, +0 ); }else if (ret >=0 && (size_t )ret < count)btrfs_delalloc_release_space (inode, offset, count - (size_t )ret);
Signature · 1 line
2.1.3
kbuild test robot
build botreproduce:
Hi Filipe,
[auto build test ERROR on v4.4-rc4]
[also build test ERROR on next-20151208]
[cannot apply to btrfs/next]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/fdmanana-kernel-org/Btrfs-fix-leaking-of-ordered-extents-after-direct-IO-write-error/20151209-182927 config: x86_64-randconfig-x008-12090811 (attached as .config) reproduce: # save the attached .config to linux build tree make ARCH=x86_64
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'btrfs_direct_IO':
>> fs/btrfs/inode.c:8528:5: error: implicit declaration of function 'btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered(inode,
^cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
vim +/btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered +8528 fs/btrfs/inode.c
8522 * without submitting corresponding bios for them, so
8523 * cleanup them up to avoid other tasks getting them
8524 * and waiting for them to complete forever.
8525 */
8526 if (dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start <
8527 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_end)
> 8528 btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered(inode,
8529 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start,
8530 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_end -
8531 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start,
---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation
Quoted 12 lines · kbuild test robot
Hi Filipe,
[auto build test ERROR on v4.4-rc4]
[also build test ERROR on next-20151208]
[cannot apply to btrfs/next]url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/fdmanana-kernel-org/Btrfs-fix-leaking-of-ordered-extents-after-direct-IO-write-error/20151209-182927 config: x86_64-randconfig-x008-12090811 (attached as .config) reproduce: # save the attached .config to linux build tree make ARCH=x86_64
Quoted 7 lines
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'btrfs_direct_IO':Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
fs/btrfs/inode.c:8528:5: error: implicit declaration of function 'btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered(inode, ^cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
Yes test robot. It depends on a previous patch
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7702051/ /
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/fdmanana/linux.git/commit/?h=integration-4.4&id=cefbb57148831bcdc47f78f5963ff6fb63a29936)
as mentioned in a comment of this patch.
Quoted 17 lines
vim +/btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered +8528
fs/btrfs/inode.c8522 * without submitting corresponding bios for them, so 8523 * cleanup them up to avoid other tasks getting them 8524 * and waiting for them to complete forever. 8525 */8526 if (dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start <
8527 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_end)Quoted 1 line
8528 btrfs_endio_direct_write_update_ordered(inode,
8529 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start, 8530 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_end - 8531 dio_data.unsubmitted_oe_range_start,---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation