On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:44:20AM +0100, Martin Svec wrote: > Hello Dave, > > Any updates on this? It's a bit annoying to workaround the bug by increasing RAM just because of the > initial quotacheck. > Note that Dave is away on a bit of an extended vacation[1]. It looks like he was in the process of fishing through the code to spot any potential problems related to quotacheck+reclaim. I see you've cc'd him directly so we'll see if we get a response wrt to if he got anywhere with that... Skimming back through this thread, it looks like we have an issue where quota check is not quite reliable in the event of reclaim, and you appear to be reproducing this due to a probably unique combination of large inode count and low memory. Is my understanding correct that you've reproduced this on more recent kernels than the original report? If so and we don't hear back from Dave in a reasonable time, it might be useful to provide a metadump of the fs if possible. That would allow us to restore in a similar low RAM vm configuration, trigger quota check and try to reproduce directly... Brian [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg02836.html > Thank you, > Martin > > Dne 3.11.2016 v 21:40 Dave Chinner napsal(a): > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 01:04:39PM +0100, Martin Svec wrote: > >> Dne 3.11.2016 v 2:31 Dave Chinner napsal(a): > >>> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 05:31:00PM +0100, Martin Svec wrote: > >>>>> How many inodes? How much RAM? > >>>> orthosie:~# df -i > >>>> Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on > >>>> /dev/sdd1 173746096 5214637 168531459 4% /www > >>>> > >>>> The virtual machine has 2 virtual cores and 2 GB RAM. None of it is a bottleneck, I think. > >>> Even though you think this is irrelevant and not important, it > >>> actually points me directly at a potential vector and a reason as to > >>> why this is not a comonly seen problem. > >>> > >>> i.e. 5.2 million inodes with only 2GB RAM is enough to cause memory > >>> pressure during a quotacheck. inode buffers alone will require > >>> a minimum of 1.5GB RAM over the course of the quotacheck, and memory > >>> reclaim will iterate cached dquots and try to flush them, thereby > >>> exercising the flush lock /before/ the quotacheck scan completion > >>> dquot writeback tries to take it. > >>> > >>> Now I need to go read code.... > >> Yes, that makes sense, I didn't know that quotacheck requires all inodes to be loaded in memory at > >> the same time. > > It doesn't require all inodes to be loaded into memory. Indeed, the > > /inodes/ don't get cached during a quotacheck. What does get cached > > is the metadata buffers that are traversed - th eproblem comes when > > the caches are being reclaimed.... > > > >> I temporarily increased virtual machine's RAM to 3GB and the > >> problem is gone! Setting RAM back to 2GB reproducibly causes the > >> quotacheck to freeze again, 1GB of RAM results in OOM... So you're > >> right that the flush deadlock is triggered by a memory pressure. > > Good to know. > > > >> Sorry, I forgot to attach sysrq-w output to the previous response. Here it is: > > <snip> > > > > ok, nothing else apparently stuck, so this is likely a leaked lock > > or completion. > > > > Ok, I'll keep looking. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Dave. > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
