Re: [PATCH v2] fstests: fsstress: wait interrupted aio to finish

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]



On 22/8/23 13:16, Qu Wenruo wrote:


On 2023/8/22 12:05, Anand Jain wrote:
On 22/08/2023 07:01, Qu Wenruo wrote:
[BUG]
There is a very low chance to hit data csum mismatch (caught by scrub)
during test case btrfs/06[234567].

After some extra digging, it turns out that plain fsstress itself is
enough to cause the problem:

```
workload()
{
    mkfs.btrfs -f -m single -d single --csum sha256 $dev1 > /dev/null
    mount $dev1 $mnt

    #$fsstress -p 10 -n 1000 -w -d $mnt
    umount $mnt
    btrfs check --check-data-csum $dev1 || fail
}

runtime=1024
for (( i = 0; i < $runtime; i++ )); do
    echo "=== $i / $runtime ==="
    workload
done
```

Inside a VM which has only 6 cores, above script can trigger with 1/20
possibility.

[CAUSE]
Locally I got a much smaller workload to reproduce:

    $fsstress -p 7 -n 50 -s 1691396493 -w -d $mnt -v > /tmp/fsstress

With extra kernel trace_prinkt() on the buffered/direct writes.

It turns out that the following direct write is always the cause:

   btrfs_do_write_iter: r/i=5/283 buffered fileoff=708608(709121) len=12288(7712)

   btrfs_do_write_iter: r/i=5/283 direct fileoff=8192(8192) len=73728(73728) <<<<<

   btrfs_do_write_iter: r/i=5/283 direct fileoff=589824(589824) len=16384(16384)

With the involved byte number, it's easy to pin down the fsstress
opeartion:

  0/31: writev d0/f3[285 2 0 0 296 1457078] [709121,8,964] 0
  0/32: chown d0/f2 308134/1763236 0

  0/33: do_aio_rw - xfsctl(XFS_IOC_DIOINFO) d0/f2[285 2 308134 1763236 320 1457078] return 25, fallback to stat()
  0/33: awrite - io_getevents failed -4 <<<<

  0/34: dwrite - xfsctl(XFS_IOC_DIOINFO) d0/f3[285 2 308134 1763236 320 1457078] return 25, fallback to stat()

Note the 0/33, when the data csum mismatch triggered, it always fail
with -4 (-EINTR).

It looks like with lucky enough concurrency, we can get to the following
situation inside fsstress:

           Process A                 |               Process B
-----------------------------------+---------------------------------------
  do_aio_rw()                        |
  |- io_sumit();                     |
  |- io_get_events();                |
  |  Returned -EINTR, but IO hasn't  |
  |  finished.                       |
  `- free(buf);                      | malloc();
                                     |  Got the same memory of @buf from
                                     |  thread A.
                                     | Modify the memory
                                     | Now the buffer is changed while
                                     | still under IO

This is the typical buffer modification during direct IO, which is going
to cause csum mismatch for btrfs, and btrfs properly detects it.

This is the direct cause of the problem.

The root cause is that, io_uring would use signals to handle
submission/completion of IOs.
Thus io_uring operations would interrupt AIO operations, thus causing
the above problem.

[FIX]
To fix the problem, we can just retry io_getevents() so that we can
properly wait for the IO.

This prevents us to modify the IO buffer before writeback really
finishes.

With this fixes, I can no longer reproduce the data corruption.

Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx>
---
Changelog:
v2:
- Fix all call sites of io_getevents()

Should io_getevents() in aio-stress.c and fsx.c also be using io_get_single_event()?

Nope, this problem is caused by the fact that io uring is using signal to notify the completion, which would interrupt io_getevents().

For aio-stress.c, there is no io uring utilized at all, thus the signals are real signals provided by users. Although it's still possible that user provided signals interrupt the operation and cause the corruption, it's not really a bit concern AFAIK.

For fsx, io uring and aio are exclusive to each other, thus it's the same as aio-stress.c.


Okay, thanks.

Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx>





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux