Hi, when testing my latest changes to DXA fault handling code I have hit the following interesting race between the fault and write path (I'll show function names for ext4 but xfs has the same issue AFAICT). We have a file 'f' which has a hole at offset 0. Process 0 Process 1 data = mmap('f'); read data[0] -> fault, we map a hole page pwrite('f', buf, len, 0) -> ext4_file_write_iter inode_lock(inode); __generic_file_write_iter() generic_file_direct_write() invalidate_inode_pages2_range() - drops hole page from the radix tree ext4_direct_IO() dax_do_io() - allocates block for offset 0 data[0] = 1 -> page_mkwrite fault -> ext4_dax_fault() down_read(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_mmap_sem); __dax_fault() grab_mapping_entry() - creates locked radix tree entry - maps block into PTE put_locked_mapping_entry() invalidate_inode_pages2_range() - removes dax entry from the radix tree So we have just lost information that block 0 is mapped and needs flushing caches. Also the fact that the consistency of data as viewed by mmap and dax_do_io() relies on invalidate_inode_pages2_range() is somewhat unexpected to me and we should document it somewhere. The question is how to best fix this. I see three options: 1) Lock out faults during writes via exclusive i_mmap_sem. That is rather harsh but should work - we call filemap_write_and_wait() in generic_file_direct_write() so we flush out all caches for the relevant area before dropping radix tree entries. 2) Call filemap_write_and_wait() after we return from ->direct_IO before we call invalidate_inode_pages2_range() and hold i_mmap_sem exclusively only for those two calls. Lock hold time will be shorter than 1) but it will require additional flush and we'd probably have to stop using generic_file_direct_write() for DAX writes to allow for all this special hackery. 3) Remodel dax_do_io() to work more like buffered IO and use radix tree entry locks to protect against similar races. That has likely better scalability than 1) but may be actually slower in the uncontended case (due to all the radix tree operations). Any opinions on this? Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html