On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 02:16:03PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 10:43:35AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > For inodes that are dirty, we have an attached cluster buffer that
> > we want to use to track the dirty inode through the AIL.
> > Unfortunately, locking the cluster buffer and adding it to the
> > transaction when the inode is first logged in a transaction leads to
> > buffer lock ordering inversions.
> >
> > The specific problem is ordering against the AGI buffer. When
> > modifying unlinked lists, the buffer lock order is AGI -> inode
> > cluster buffer as the AGI buffer lock serialises all access to the
> > unlinked lists. Unfortunately, functionality like xfs_droplink()
> > logs the inode before calling xfs_iunlink(), as do various directory
> > manipulation functions. The inode can be logged way down in the
> > stack as far as the bmapi routines and hence, without a major
> > rewrite of lots of APIs there's no way we can avoid the inode being
> > logged by something until after the AGI has been logged.
> >
> > As we are going to be using ordered buffers for inode AIL tracking,
> > there isn't a need to actually lock that buffer against modification
> > as all the modifications are captured by logging the inode item
> > itself. Hence we don't actually need to join the cluster buffer into
> > the transaction until just before it is committed. This means we do
> > not perturb any of the existing buffer lock orders in transactions,
> > and the inode cluster buffer is always locked last in a transaction
> > that doesn't otherwise touch inode cluster buffers.
> >
> > We do this by introducing a precommit log item method. A log item
> > method is used because it is likely dquots will be moved to this
> > same ordered buffer tracking scheme and hence will need a similar
>
> Oh?
Stale comment from the original series a couple of year ago, I
think.
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> > index 82cf0189c0db..0acb31093d9f 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> > @@ -844,6 +844,90 @@ xfs_trans_committed_bulk(
> > spin_unlock(&ailp->ail_lock);
> > }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Sort transaction items prior to running precommit operations. This will
> > + * attempt to order the items such that they will always be locked in the same
> > + * order. Items that have no sort function are moved to the end of the list
> > + * and so are locked last (XXX: need to check the logic matches the comment).
> > + *
> > + * This may need refinement as different types of objects add sort functions.
> > + *
> > + * Function is more complex than it needs to be because we are comparing 64 bit
> > + * values and the function only returns 32 bit values.
> > + */
> > +static int
> > +xfs_trans_precommit_sort(
> > + void *unused_arg,
> > + const struct list_head *a,
> > + const struct list_head *b)
> > +{
> > + struct xfs_log_item *lia = container_of(a,
> > + struct xfs_log_item, li_trans);
> > + struct xfs_log_item *lib = container_of(b,
> > + struct xfs_log_item, li_trans);
> > + int64_t diff;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If both items are non-sortable, leave them alone. If only one is
> > + * sortable, move the non-sortable item towards the end of the list.
> > + */
> > + if (!lia->li_ops->iop_sort && !lib->li_ops->iop_sort)
> > + return 0;
> > + if (!lia->li_ops->iop_sort)
> > + return 1;
> > + if (!lib->li_ops->iop_sort)
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + diff = lia->li_ops->iop_sort(lia) - lib->li_ops->iop_sort(lib);
>
> I'm kinda surprised the iop_sort method doesn't take both log item
> pointers, like most sorting-comparator functions? But I'll see, maybe
> you're doing something clever wrt ordering of log items of differing
> types, and hence the ->iop_sort implementations are required to return
> some absolute priority or something.
Nope, we have to order item locking based on an unchanging
characteristic of the object. log items can come and go, we want to
lock items in consistent ascending order, so it has to be based on
some kind of physical characteristic, like inode number, block
address, etc.
e.g. If all objects are ordered by the physical location, we naturally
get a lock order that can be applied sanely across differing object
types e.g. AG headers will naturally sort and lock before buffers
in the AG itself. e.g. inode cluster buffers for unlinked list
manipulations will always get locked after the AGI....
Cheers,
Dave.
> --D
>
> > + if (diff < 0)
> > + return -1;
> > + if (diff > 0)
> > + return 1;
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Run transaction precommit functions.
> > + *
> > + * If there is an error in any of the callouts, then stop immediately and
> > + * trigger a shutdown to abort the transaction. There is no recovery possible
> > + * from errors at this point as the transaction is dirty....
> > + */
> > +static int
> > +xfs_trans_run_precommits(
> > + struct xfs_trans *tp)
> > +{
> > + struct xfs_mount *mp = tp->t_mountp;
> > + struct xfs_log_item *lip, *n;
> > + int error = 0;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Sort the item list to avoid ABBA deadlocks with other transactions
> > + * running precommit operations that lock multiple shared items such as
> > + * inode cluster buffers.
> > + */
> > + list_sort(NULL, &tp->t_items, xfs_trans_precommit_sort);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Precommit operations can remove the log item from the transaction
> > + * if the log item exists purely to delay modifications until they
> > + * can be ordered against other operations. Hence we have to use
> > + * list_for_each_entry_safe() here.
> > + */
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe(lip, n, &tp->t_items, li_trans) {
> > + if (!test_bit(XFS_LI_DIRTY, &lip->li_flags))
> > + continue;
> > + if (lip->li_ops->iop_precommit) {
> > + error = lip->li_ops->iop_precommit(tp, lip);
> > + if (error)
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + if (error)
> > + xfs_force_shutdown(mp, SHUTDOWN_CORRUPT_INCORE);
> > + return error;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * Commit the given transaction to the log.
> > *
> > @@ -869,6 +953,13 @@ __xfs_trans_commit(
> >
> > trace_xfs_trans_commit(tp, _RET_IP_);
> >
> > + error = xfs_trans_run_precommits(tp);
> > + if (error) {
> > + if (tp->t_flags & XFS_TRANS_PERM_LOG_RES)
> > + xfs_defer_cancel(tp);
> > + goto out_unreserve;
> > + }
> > +
> > /*
> > * Finish deferred items on final commit. Only permanent transactions
> > * should ever have deferred ops.
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h
> > index 9561f193e7e1..64062e3b788b 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h
> > @@ -71,10 +71,12 @@ struct xfs_item_ops {
> > void (*iop_format)(struct xfs_log_item *, struct xfs_log_vec *);
> > void (*iop_pin)(struct xfs_log_item *);
> > void (*iop_unpin)(struct xfs_log_item *, int remove);
> > - uint (*iop_push)(struct xfs_log_item *, struct list_head *);
> > + uint64_t (*iop_sort)(struct xfs_log_item *lip);
> > + int (*iop_precommit)(struct xfs_trans *tp, struct xfs_log_item *lip);
> > void (*iop_committing)(struct xfs_log_item *lip, xfs_csn_t seq);
> > - void (*iop_release)(struct xfs_log_item *);
> > xfs_lsn_t (*iop_committed)(struct xfs_log_item *, xfs_lsn_t);
> > + uint (*iop_push)(struct xfs_log_item *, struct list_head *);
> > + void (*iop_release)(struct xfs_log_item *);
>
> Why did these get moved?
<shrug> reasons lost in the mist of times. Probably because I wanted
the sort->precommit->committing->committed to be listed in the order
they are actually called by a transaciton commit?
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
