On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 12:21:37 AM IST Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 05:09:47PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 20, 2018 2:03:59 AM IST Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 06:45:26PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 2:01:13 PM IST Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, November 29, 2018 4:56:58 AM IST Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here are fixes for some problems with the inode btree scrub code, namely
> > > > > > that the existing code does not handle the case where a single inode
> > > > > > cluster is mapped by multiple inobt records.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patch 1 teaches the inode record block counting code to handle the case
> > > > > > where there's more than one inobt record per inode cluster. We do this
> > > > > > by counting inodes and converting to blocks only at the end.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patch 2 corrects a condition where we needed to clamp the number of
> > > > > > inodes checked for a given inobt record to the inode chunk size.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patches 3-4 move the inobt record alignment checks to a separate
> > > > > > function and enhance the function to check that when we have more than
> > > > > > one inobt record per cluster we actually check that *all* of the
> > > > > > necessary records are present and in the correct order.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patches 5-7 reorganize the inobt free data checks to deal with the
> > > > > > "multiple inobt records per icluster" situation. In restructuring the
> > > > > > code to do so, we also rename variables and functions to be less
> > > > > > confusing about what they're there for. We also fix the 'is the inode
> > > > > > free?' check to calculate dinode buffer offsets correctly in the
> > > > > > "multiple inobt records per icluster" situation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patch 8 aborts the xattr scrub loop if there are pending fatal signals.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patch 9 checks that for any directory or attr fork there are no extent
> > > > > > maps that stretch beyond what a xfs_dablk_t can map.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you're going to start using this mess, you probably ought to just
> > > > > > pull from my git trees. The kernel patches[1] should apply against
> > > > > > 4.20-rc4.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Comments and questions are, as always, welcome.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Darrick,
> > > > >
> > > > > I reviewed patches 1 through 7. The fixes look good.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not well versed with the XFS code that deals with xattrs &
> > > > > directories. Hence I could not review patches 8 and 9.
> > > > >
> > > > > I did a simple scrub test on a 64k blocksized filesystem running a kernel
> > > > > having the following commit as the HEAD,
> > > > >
> > > > > commit 6c4e1579b332e52566c11416e0dd0fa91a3b8f70 (HEAD -> djwong-devel, djwong-xfs-linux/djwong-devel)
> > > > > Author: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Date: Thu Oct 18 17:35:49 2018 -0700
> > > > >
> > > > > xfs: repair quotas
> > > > >
> > > > > Fix anything that causes the quota verifiers to fail.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Xfsprogs had the following as the topmost commit,
> > > > >
> > > > > commit 633eec2a893c3be9796dad188144b00e084560ec (HEAD -> djwong-devel, djwong/djwong-devel)
> > > > > Author: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Date: Tue Nov 13 17:38:31 2018 -0800
> > > > >
> > > > > xfs: repair extended attributes
> > > > >
> > > > > If the extended attributes look bad, try to sift through the rubble to
> > > > > find whatever keys/values we can, zap the attr tree, and re-add the
> > > > > values.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The test filesystem had 2000 files with each being 64k in size.
> > > > >
> > > > > root@ubuntu:~# xfs_scrub -d -n -v /mnt/
> > > > > EXPERIMENTAL xfs_scrub program in use! Use at your own risk!
> > > > > Phase 1: Find filesystem geometry.
> > > > > /mnt/: using 8 threads to scrub.
> > > > > Phase 2: Check internal metadata.
> > > > > Info: AG 1 superblock: Optimization is possible. (scrub.c line 269)
> > > > > Info: AG 3 superblock: Optimization is possible. (scrub.c line 269)
> > > > > Info: AG 2 superblock: Optimization is possible. (scrub.c line 269)
> > > > > Error: AG 0 free inode btree: Repairs are required. (scrub.c line 253)
> > > > > Phase 3: Scan all inodes.
> > > > > Phase 5: Check directory tree.
> > > > > Info: /mnt/: Filesystem has errors, skipping connectivity checks. (phase5.c line 295)
> > > > > Phase 7: Check summary counters.
> > > > > 163.9MiB data used; 1.9K inodes used.
> > > > > 152.7MiB data found; 1.9K inodes found.
> > > > > 1.9K inodes counted; 1.9K inodes checked.
> > > > > /mnt/: errors found: 1
> > > > > /mnt/: Re-run xfs_scrub without -n.
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks like we have a bug when scrubbing the Free inode btree. I will work on
> > > > > figuring out the root cause and also plan to execute scrub tests shipped with
> > > > > xfstests.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > We do have an unaligned finobt record,
> > > >
> > > > xfs_scrub 27247 [004] 18014.774762: probe:xchk_iallocbt_rec_alignment: (c00000000075941c) ir_startino=176960 ig_cluster_align_inodes=128 imask_u32=127
> > > > c00000000075941c xchk_iallocbt_rec_alignment+0x10c (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c00000000075966c xchk_iallocbt_rec+0x14c (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > 0 [unknown] ([unknown])
> > > > c000000000752968 xchk_btree+0x288 (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c0000000007598c4 xchk_iallocbt+0x64 (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c00000000075dc1c xfs_scrub_metadata+0x4ac (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c0000000006e4b88 xfs_ioc_scrub_metadata+0x68 (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c0000000006e7d5c xfs_file_ioctl+0xbbc (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c000000000425e04 do_vfs_ioctl+0xd4 (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c000000000426874 ksys_ioctl+0x64 (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c000000000426928 __se_sys_ioctl+0x28 (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > c00000000000bae4 system_call+0x5c (/boot/vmlinux)
> > > > 7ffff77d7694 __GI___ioctl+0x114 (/lib/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/libc-2.27.so)
> > > > 10000e4e0 xfs_check_metadata+0x100 (/root/repos/xfsprogs-dev/scrub/xfs_scrub)
> > > > 10000e484 xfs_check_metadata+0xa4 (/root/repos/xfsprogs-dev/scrub/xfs_scrub)
> > > > 10000ec48 xfs_scrub_metadata+0xd8 (/root/repos/xfsprogs-dev/scrub/xfs_scrub)
> > > > 100008dac xfs_scan_ag_metadata+0x12c (/root/repos/xfsprogs-dev/scrub/xfs_scrub)
> > > > 1000198c8 workqueue_thread+0x108 (/root/repos/xfsprogs-dev/scrub/xfs_scrub)
> > > > 7ffff7f2885c start_thread+0x10c (/lib/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/libpthread-2.27.so)
> > > > 7ffff77e9028 __clone+0x98 (/lib/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/libc-2.27.so)
> > > >
> > > > Maybe this is due to a bug in the finobt code. I will continue debugging and
> > > > report my findings.
> > >
> > > Ok. Feel free to send along a metadump if you have one.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Indeed, XFS does not align finobt records according to inode cluster size.
> >
> > More precisely, For big block filesystems, When freeing inodes (please refer
> > to xfs_difree_inobt()), XFS does not delete inobt records due to the following
> > code evaluating to false,
> >
> > if (!(mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_IKEEP) &&
> > rec.ir_free == XFS_INOBT_ALL_FREE &&
> > mp->m_sb.sb_inopblock <= XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK) {
> >
> > However there is no such conditional check when deleting finobt records.
> > Hence I wrote the following patch,
> >
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ialloc.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > fs/xfs/scrub/ialloc.c | 2 +
> > 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ialloc.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ialloc.c
> > index f32be0c85f93..8d3edd758413 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ialloc.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ialloc.c
> > @@ -1399,14 +1399,19 @@ xfs_dialloc_ag_finobt_near(
> > struct xfs_btree_cur *lcur = *ocur; /* left search cursor */
> > struct xfs_btree_cur *rcur; /* right search cursor */
> > struct xfs_inobt_rec_incore rrec;
> > + xfs_agino_t agino;
> > int error;
> > int i, j;
> >
> > - error = xfs_inobt_lookup(lcur, pagino, XFS_LOOKUP_LE, &i);
> > - if (error)
> > - return error;
> > + agino = pagino;
> > + while (1) {
> > + error = xfs_inobt_lookup(lcur, agino, XFS_LOOKUP_LE, &i);
> > + if (error)
> > + return error;
> > +
> > + if (i != 1)
> > + break;
> >
> > - if (i == 1) {
> > error = xfs_inobt_get_rec(lcur, rec, &i);
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> > @@ -1417,23 +1422,39 @@ xfs_dialloc_ag_finobt_near(
> > * only tracks chunks with at least one free inode, so record
> > * existence is enough.
> > */
> > - if (pagino >= rec->ir_startino &&
> > - pagino < (rec->ir_startino + XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK))
> > - return 0;
> > + if (rec->ir_freecount) {
> > + if (pagino >= rec->ir_startino &&
> > + pagino < (rec->ir_startino + XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK))
> > + return 0;
> > + else
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + agino = rec->ir_startino - 1;
> > }
> >
> > error = xfs_btree_dup_cursor(lcur, &rcur);
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> >
> > - error = xfs_inobt_lookup(rcur, pagino, XFS_LOOKUP_GE, &j);
> > - if (error)
> > - goto error_rcur;
> > - if (j == 1) {
> > + agino = pagino;
> > + while (1) {
> > + error = xfs_inobt_lookup(rcur, agino, XFS_LOOKUP_GE, &j);
> > + if (error)
> > + goto error_rcur;
> > +
> > + if (j != 1)
> > + break;
> > +
> > error = xfs_inobt_get_rec(rcur, &rrec, &j);
> > if (error)
> > goto error_rcur;
> > XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO(lcur->bc_mp, j == 1, error_rcur);
> > +
> > + if (rrec.ir_freecount)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + agino = rrec.ir_startino + XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK;
> > }
> >
> > XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO(lcur->bc_mp, i == 1 || j == 1, error_rcur);
> > @@ -1477,6 +1498,7 @@ xfs_dialloc_ag_finobt_newino(
> > struct xfs_btree_cur *cur,
> > struct xfs_inobt_rec_incore *rec)
> > {
> > + xfs_agino_t agino;
> > int error;
> > int i;
> >
> > @@ -1490,22 +1512,32 @@ xfs_dialloc_ag_finobt_newino(
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> > XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN(cur->bc_mp, i == 1);
> > - return 0;
> > +
> > + if (rec->ir_freecount)
> > + return 0;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > * Find the first inode available in the AG.
> > */
> > - error = xfs_inobt_lookup(cur, 0, XFS_LOOKUP_GE, &i);
> > - if (error)
> > - return error;
> > - XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN(cur->bc_mp, i == 1);
> > + agino = 0;
> > + while (1) {
> > + error = xfs_inobt_lookup(cur, agino, XFS_LOOKUP_GE, &i);
> > + if (error)
> > + return error;
> > + XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN(cur->bc_mp, i == 1);
> >
> > - error = xfs_inobt_get_rec(cur, rec, &i);
> > - if (error)
> > - return error;
> > - XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN(cur->bc_mp, i == 1);
> > + error = xfs_inobt_get_rec(cur, rec, &i);
> > + if (error)
> > + return error;
> > + XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN(cur->bc_mp, i == 1);
> > +
> > + if (rec->ir_freecount)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + agino += XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK;
> > + }
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> > @@ -1615,10 +1647,17 @@ xfs_dialloc_ag(
> > */
> > rec.ir_free &= ~XFS_INOBT_MASK(offset);
> > rec.ir_freecount--;
> > - if (rec.ir_freecount)
> > + if (rec.ir_freecount) {
> > error = xfs_inobt_update(cur, &rec);
> > - else
> > - error = xfs_btree_delete(cur, &i);
> > + } else {
> > + if (!(mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_IKEEP) &&
> > + /* TODO: Add a condition to check hole mask */
> > + mp->m_sb.sb_inopblock <= XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK)
> > + error = xfs_btree_delete(cur, &i);
> > + else
> > + error = xfs_inobt_update(cur, &rec);
> > + }
> > +
> > if (error)
> > goto error_cur;
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/scrub/ialloc.c b/fs/xfs/scrub/ialloc.c
> > index 9269f5158cdc..838161f25db4 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/scrub/ialloc.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/ialloc.c
> > @@ -79,9 +79,11 @@ xchk_iallocbt_chunk_xref_other(
> > error = xfs_ialloc_has_inode_record(*pcur, agino, agino, &has_irec);
> > if (!xchk_should_check_xref(sc, &error, pcur))
> > return;
> > +#if 0
> > if (((irec->ir_freecount > 0 && !has_irec) ||
> > (irec->ir_freecount == 0 && has_irec)))
> > xchk_btree_xref_set_corrupt(sc, *pcur, 0);
> > +#endif
> > }
> >
> > /* Cross-reference with the other btrees. */
>
> I don't think this is a good idea, because this now breaks the notion
> that the free inode btree contains only records for where there actually
> /are/ free inodes. AFAICT, the entire point of the finobt is to be a
> condensed version of the inobt that only points to the free inodes, to
> save time while creating files. If we start writing ir_freecount == 0
> finobt records now, what will older kernels think of this?
>
> Furthermore, for these 'big block' filesystems we've already been
> writing out individual finobt records that aren't aligned to anything
> more than the cluster size. These filesystems are already out in the
> wild, so it is scrub that must adapt to this circumstance.
>
> I think it's better to change xchk_iallocbt_rec_alignment to have a
> different check at the top when we're checking finobt records:
>
> /*
> * finobt records have different positioning requirements than inobt
> * records: each finobt record must have a corresponding inobt record.
> * That is checked in the xref function, so for now we only catch the
> * obvious case where the record isn't even chunk-aligned.
> *
> * Note also that if a fs block contains more than a single chunk of
> * inodes, we will have finobt records only for those chunks containing
> * free inodes.
> */
> if (bs->cur->bc_btnum == XFS_BTNUM_FINO) {
> imask = XFS_INODES_PER_CHUNK - 1;
> if (irec->ir_startino & imask)
> xchk_btree_set_corrupt(bs->sc, bs->cur, 0);
> return;
> }
>
The above solution looks perfect and passes the simple "create 2000 files" and
"execute xfs_scrub" on 64k block sized filesystem. I will execute the scrub
tests that are part of fstests suite and let you know if there is a failure.
--
chandan
