On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:06:09 +0100 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed 02-01-08 12:42:19, Zach Brown wrote: > > Erez Zadok wrote: > > > Setting: ltp-full-20071031, dio01 test on ext3 with Linus's > > > latest tree. Kernel w/ SMP, preemption, and lockdep configured. > > > > This is a real lock ordering problem. Thanks for reporting it. > > > > The updating of atime inside sys_mmap() orders the mmap_sem in the > > vfs outside of the journal handle in ext3's inode dirtying: > > [ lock inversion traces ] > > Two fixes come to mind: > > > > 1) use something like Peter's ->mmap_prepare() to update atime > > before acquiring the mmap_sem. > > ( http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/11/11/97 ). I don't know if this would > > leave more paths which do a journal_start() while holding the > > mmap_sem. > > > > 2) rework ext3's dio to only hold the jbd handle in > > ext3_get_block(). Chris has a patch for this kicking around > > somewhere but I'm told it has problems exposing old blocks in > > ordered data mode. > > > > Does anyone have preferences? I could go either way. I certainly > > don't like the idea of journal handles being held across the > > entirety of fs/direct-io.c. It's yet another case of O_DIRECT > > differing wildly from the buffered path :(. > I've looked more into it and I think that 2) is the only way to go > since transaction start ranks below page lock (standard buffered > write path) and page lock ranks below mmap_sem. So we have at least > one more dependency mmap_sem must go before transaction start... Just to clarify a little bit: If ext3's DIO code only touches transactions in get_block, then it can violate data=ordered rules. Basically the transaction that allocates the blocks might commit before the DIO code gets around to writing them. A crash in the wrong place will expose stale data on disk. -chris _______________________________________________ Ext3-users mailing list Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
