On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 06:39:25PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> When calling into _xfs_log_force{,_lsn}() with a pointer >> to log_flushed variable, log_flushed will be set to 1 if: >> 1. xlog_sync() is called to flush the active log buffer >> AND/OR >> 2. xlog_wait() is called to wait on a syncing log buffers >> >> xfs_file_fsync() checks the value of log_flushed after >> _xfs_log_force_lsn() call to optimize away an explicit >> PREFLUSH request to the data block device after writing >> out all the file's pages to disk. >> >> This optimization is incorrect in the following sequence of events: >> >> Task A Task B >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> xfs_file_fsync() >> _xfs_log_force_lsn() >> xlog_sync() >> [submit PREFLUSH] >> xfs_file_fsync() >> file_write_and_wait_range() >> [submit WRITE X] >> [endio WRITE X] >> _xfs_log_force_lsn() >> xlog_wait() >> [endio PREFLUSH] >> >> The write X is not guarantied to be on persistent storage >> when PREFLUSH request in completed, because write A was submitted >> after the PREFLUSH request, but xfs_file_fsync() of task A will >> be notified of log_flushed=1 and will skip explicit flush. >> >> If the system crashes after fsync of task A, write X may not be >> present on disk after reboot. >> >> This bug was discovered and demonstrated using Josef Bacik's >> dm-log-writes target, which can be used to record block io operations >> and then replay a subset of these operations onto the target device. >> The test goes something like this: >> - Use fsx to execute ops of a file and record ops on log device >> - Every now and then fsync the file, store md5 of file and mark > >> md5 of file to stored value >> >> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> >> Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx> >> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> >> Christoph, >> >> Here is another, more subtle, version of the fix. >> It keeps a lot more use cases optimized (e.g. many threads doing fsync >> and setting WANT_SYNC may still be optimized). >> It also addresses your concern that xlog_state_release_iclog() >> may not actually start the buffer sync. >> >> I tried to keep the logic as simple as possible: >> If we see a buffer who is not yet SYNCING and we later >> see that l_last_sync_lsn is >= to the lsn of that buffer, >> we can safely say log_flushed. >> >> I only tested this patch through a few crash test runs, not even full >> xfstests cycle, so I am not sure it is correct, just posting to get >> your feedback. >> >> Is it worth something over the simpler v1 patch? >> I can't really say. >> > > This looks like it has a couple potential problems on a very quick look > (so I could definitely be mistaken). E.g., the lsn could be zero at the > time we set log_flushed in _xfs_log_force(). It also looks like waiting > on an iclog that is waiting to run callbacks due to out of order > completion could be interpreted as a log flush having occurred, but I > haven't stared at this long enough to say whether that is actually > possible. > > Stepping back from the details.. this seems like it could be done > correctly in general. IIUC what you want to know is whether any iclog > went from a pre-SYNCING state to a post-SYNCING state during the log > force, right? The drawbacks to this are that the log states do not by > design tell us whether devices have been flushed (landmine alert). > AFAICS, the last tail lsn isn't necessarily updated on every I/O > completion either. > > I'm really confused by the preoccupation with finding a way to keep this > fix localized to xfs_log_force(), as if that provides some inherent > advantage over fundamentally more simple code. If anything, the fact > that this has been broken for so long suggests that is not the case. > Brian, Don't let my motives confuse you, the localized approach has two reasons: 1. I though there may be a low hanging fix, because of already existing lsn counters 2. I lack the experience and time to make the 'correct' fix you suggested > I'll reiterate my previous comment.. if we want to track device flush > submits+completes, please just track them directly in the buftarg using > the existing buffer flush flag and the common buffer > submission/completion paths that we already use for this kind of generic > mechanism (e.g., in-flight async I/O accounting, read/write verifiers). > I don't really see any benefit to this, at least until/unless we find > some reason to rule out the other approach. > If I wasn't clear, my patch was not meant to object to your comment, just to display the alternative. If someone else posts a 'proper' patch I will test it with crash simulator. I recon that's not going to be for rc1 anyway. Cheers, Amir. -- 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