https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205833 --- Comment #3 from bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx --- On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 09:34:34AM +0000, bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205833 > > --- Comment #2 from Stefan @dns2utf8 Schindler (kernel.org@xxxxxxxxx) --- > Hi Brian > > Thank you! Here is the stack of a blocked `tail 0.txt` process: > > cat /proc/276/stack > [<0>] call_rwsem_down_read_failed+0x18/0x30 > [<0>] __percpu_down_read+0x58/0x80 > [<0>] __sb_start_write+0x65/0x70 > [<0>] xfs_trans_alloc+0xec/0x130 [xfs] > [<0>] xfs_free_eofblocks+0x12a/0x1e0 [xfs] > [<0>] xfs_release+0x144/0x170 [xfs] > [<0>] xfs_file_release+0x15/0x20 [xfs] > [<0>] __fput+0xea/0x220 > [<0>] ____fput+0xe/0x10 > [<0>] task_work_run+0x9d/0xc0 > [<0>] ptrace_notify+0x84/0x90 > [<0>] tracehook_report_syscall_exit+0x90/0xd0 > [<0>] syscall_slow_exit_work+0x50/0xd0 > [<0>] do_syscall_64+0x12b/0x130 > [<0>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x3d/0xa2 > [<0>] 0xffffffffffffffff > > Your explanation matches the behaviour I see on the system. > > If there was a patch, do you think it would get backported or just stay in > mainline and ship with the regular releases? > There was a patch, but it was RFC and hadn't been merged because IIRC more investigation/testing was required to evaluate side effects. For reference, the last post I see is the one below. In particular, patch 3 bypasses EOF block truncation from read-only file descriptors (I believe the file writer task would still block). https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=154951612101291&w=2 Based on the stack above, note that this is (at least for the time being) expected behavior on XFS. Brian > Best, > Stefan > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You are watching the assignee of the bug. > -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.
