On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 07:49:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 11:17:55AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 09:11:31AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > When we're remounting the filesystem readonly, remove all CoW
> > > preallocations prior to going ro. If the fs goes down after the ro
> > > remount, we never clean up the staging extents, which means xfs_check
> > > will trip over them on a subsequent run. Practically speaking, the
> > > next mount will clean them up too, so this is unlikely to be seen.
> > >
> > > Found by adding clonerange to fsstress and running xfs/017.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_super.c | 8 ++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > >
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > index f663022..7b6d150 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> > > @@ -1369,6 +1369,14 @@ xfs_fs_remount(
> > >
> > > /* rw -> ro */
> > > if (!(mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_RDONLY) && (*flags & MS_RDONLY)) {
> > > + /* Get rid of any leftover CoW reservations... */
> > > + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&mp->m_cowblocks_work);
> > > + error = xfs_icache_free_cowblocks(mp, NULL);
> > > + if (error) {
> > > + xfs_force_shutdown(mp, SHUTDOWN_CORRUPT_INCORE);
> > > + return error;
> > > + }
> >
> > On rw->ro do we start the m_cowblocks_work back up?
>
> Assuming you meant to ask about ro->rw, then yes it should get started
> back up the next time something sets the cowblocks tag. I'm not opposed
> to starting it back up directly from the ro->rw handler.
>
> > What about when we freeze the filesystem - shouldn't we clean
> > up the cow blocks there, too? We've tried hard in the past to make
> > freeze and rw->ro exactly the same so that if the system is powered
> > down while frozen it comes up almost entirely clean just like a
> > ro-remount in shutdown....
>
> I don't see a hard requirement to clean them up at freeze time, though
> we certainly can do it for consistency's sake.
can't the background worker come around and attempt to do cleanup
while the fs is frozen? We've had vectors like that in the past that
have written to frozen filesystems (e.g. inode reclaim writing
inodes, memory reclaim shrinkers triggering AIL pushes) so leaving
potentially dirty objects in memory when the filesystem is frozen
is kinda dangerous. That's the reason behind trying to make
freeze/ro states identical - it makes sure we don't accidentally
leave writable objects in memory when frozen...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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
