Stefan Behrens
2012-Aug-10 13:38 UTC
[PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
So far the return code of barrier_all_devices() is ignored, which
means that errors are ignored. The result can be a corrupt
filesystem which is not consistent.
This commit adds code to evaluate the return code of
barrier_all_devices(). The normal btrfs_error() mechanism is used to
switch the filesystem into read-only mode when errors are detected.
In order to decide whether barrier_all_devices() should return
error or success, the number of disks that are allowed to fail the
barrier submission is calculated. This calculation accounts for the
worst RAID level of metadata, system and data. If single, dup or
RAID0 is in use, a single disk error is already considered to be
fatal. Otherwise a single disk error is tolerated.
The calculation of the number of disks that are tolerated to fail
the barrier operation is performed when the filesystem gets mounted,
when a balance operation is started and finished, and when devices
are added or removed.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de>
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 5 +++
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
fs/btrfs/disk-io.h | 2 +
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 8 ++--
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 7 +++-
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 30 +++++++++++++++
6 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index adb1cd7..af38d6d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
@@ -1442,6 +1442,8 @@ struct btrfs_fs_info {
/* next backup root to be overwritten */
int backup_root_index;
+
+ int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures;
};
/*
@@ -3309,6 +3311,9 @@ void btrfs_inherit_iflags(struct inode *inode, struct
inode *dir);
int btrfs_defrag_file(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
struct btrfs_ioctl_defrag_range_args *range,
u64 newer_than, unsigned long max_pages);
+void btrfs_get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list,
+ struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space);
+
/* file.c */
int btrfs_add_inode_defrag(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
struct inode *inode);
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index f6a1d0f..b12b3b4 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
@@ -2494,6 +2494,8 @@ retry_root_backup:
printk(KERN_ERR "Failed to read block groups: %d\n", ret);
goto fail_block_groups;
}
+ fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures +
btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info);
fs_info->cleaner_kthread = kthread_run(cleaner_kthread, tree_root,
"btrfs-cleaner");
@@ -2877,12 +2879,10 @@ static int write_dev_flush(struct btrfs_device *device,
int wait)
printk_in_rcu("btrfs: disabling barriers on dev %s\n",
rcu_str_deref(device->name));
device->nobarriers = 1;
- }
- if (!bio_flagged(bio, BIO_UPTODATE)) {
+ } else if (!bio_flagged(bio, BIO_UPTODATE)) {
ret = -EIO;
- if (!bio_flagged(bio, BIO_EOPNOTSUPP))
- btrfs_dev_stat_inc_and_print(device,
- BTRFS_DEV_STAT_FLUSH_ERRS);
+ btrfs_dev_stat_inc_and_print(device,
+ BTRFS_DEV_STAT_FLUSH_ERRS);
}
/* drop the reference from the wait == 0 run */
@@ -2921,14 +2921,15 @@ static int barrier_all_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info
*info)
{
struct list_head *head;
struct btrfs_device *dev;
- int errors = 0;
+ int errors_send = 0;
+ int errors_wait = 0;
int ret;
/* send down all the barriers */
head = &info->fs_devices->devices;
list_for_each_entry_rcu(dev, head, dev_list) {
if (!dev->bdev) {
- errors++;
+ errors_send++;
continue;
}
if (!dev->in_fs_metadata || !dev->writeable)
@@ -2936,13 +2937,13 @@ static int barrier_all_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info
*info)
ret = write_dev_flush(dev, 0);
if (ret)
- errors++;
+ errors_send++;
}
/* wait for all the barriers */
list_for_each_entry_rcu(dev, head, dev_list) {
if (!dev->bdev) {
- errors++;
+ errors_wait++;
continue;
}
if (!dev->in_fs_metadata || !dev->writeable)
@@ -2950,13 +2951,87 @@ static int barrier_all_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info
*info)
ret = write_dev_flush(dev, 1);
if (ret)
- errors++;
+ errors_wait++;
}
- if (errors)
+ if (errors_send > info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures ||
+ errors_wait > info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures)
return -EIO;
return 0;
}
+int btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(
+ struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
+{
+ struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info space;
+ struct btrfs_space_info *sinfo;
+ u64 types[] = {BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA,
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM,
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA,
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA};
+ int num_types = 4;
+ int i;
+ int c;
+ int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures +
(int)fs_info->fs_devices->num_devices;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < num_types; i++) {
+ struct btrfs_space_info *tmp;
+
+ sinfo = NULL;
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ list_for_each_entry_rcu(tmp, &fs_info->space_info, list) {
+ if (tmp->flags == types[i]) {
+ sinfo = tmp;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+
+ if (!sinfo)
+ continue;
+
+ down_read(&sinfo->groups_sem);
+ for (c = 0; c < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; c++) {
+ if (!list_empty(&sinfo->block_groups[c])) {
+ u64 flags;
+
+ btrfs_get_block_group_info(
+ &sinfo->block_groups[c], &space);
+ if (space.total_bytes == 0 ||
+ space.used_bytes == 0)
+ continue;
+ flags = space.flags;
+ /*
+ * return
+ * 0: if dup, single or RAID0 is configured for
+ * any of metadata, system or data, else
+ * 1: if RAID5 is configured, or if RAID1 or
+ * RAID10 is configured and only two mirrors
+ * are used, else
+ * 2: if RAID6 is configured, else
+ * num_mirrors - 1: if RAID1 or RAID10 is
+ * configured and more than
+ * 2 mirrors are used.
+ */
+ if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 &&
+ ((flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP |
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0)) ||
+ ((flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK)
+ == 0)))
+ num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 0;
+ else if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 1
+ &&
+ (flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 |
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10)))
+ num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 1;
+ }
+ }
+ up_read(&sinfo->groups_sem);
+ }
+
+ return num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures;
+}
+
int write_all_supers(struct btrfs_root *root, int max_mirrors)
{
struct list_head *head;
@@ -2979,8 +3054,16 @@ int write_all_supers(struct btrfs_root *root, int
max_mirrors)
mutex_lock(&root->fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
head = &root->fs_info->fs_devices->devices;
- if (do_barriers)
- barrier_all_devices(root->fs_info);
+ if (do_barriers) {
+ ret = barrier_all_devices(root->fs_info);
+ if (ret) {
+ mutex_unlock(
+ &root->fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
+ btrfs_error(root->fs_info, ret,
+ "errors while submitting device barriers.");
+ return ret;
+ }
+ }
list_for_each_entry_rcu(dev, head, dev_list) {
if (!dev->bdev) {
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
index c5b00a7..2025a91 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h
@@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ struct btrfs_root *btrfs_create_tree(struct btrfs_trans_handle
*trans,
u64 objectid);
int btree_lock_page_hook(struct page *page, void *data,
void (*flush_fn)(void *));
+int btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(
+ struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info);
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
void btrfs_init_lockdep(void);
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
index 43f0012..6cd4125 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
@@ -2852,8 +2852,8 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_default_subvol(struct file *file,
void __user *argp)
return 0;
}
-static void get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list,
- struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space)
+void btrfs_get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list,
+ struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space)
{
struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group;
@@ -2961,8 +2961,8 @@ long btrfs_ioctl_space_info(struct btrfs_root *root, void
__user *arg)
down_read(&info->groups_sem);
for (c = 0; c < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; c++) {
if (!list_empty(&info->block_groups[c])) {
- get_block_group_info(&info->block_groups[c],
- &space);
+ btrfs_get_block_group_info(
+ &info->block_groups[c], &space);
memcpy(dest, &space, sizeof(space));
dest++;
space_args.total_spaces++;
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
index c86670f..c30e1c0 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
@@ -2171,9 +2171,12 @@ int btrfs_sync_log(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
* in and cause problems either.
*/
btrfs_scrub_pause_super(root);
- write_ctree_super(trans, root->fs_info->tree_root, 1);
+ ret = write_ctree_super(trans, root->fs_info->tree_root, 1);
btrfs_scrub_continue_super(root);
- ret = 0;
+ if (ret) {
+ btrfs_abort_transaction(trans, root, ret);
+ goto out_wake_log_root;
+ }
mutex_lock(&root->log_mutex);
if (root->last_log_commit < log_transid)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index b8708f9..48ccaa4 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -1474,6 +1474,9 @@ int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_root *root, char
*device_path)
free_fs_devices(cur_devices);
}
+ root->fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures +
btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(root->fs_info);
+
/*
* at this point, the device is zero sized. We want to
* remove it from the devices list and zero out the old super
@@ -1796,6 +1799,8 @@ int btrfs_init_new_device(struct btrfs_root *root, char
*device_path)
btrfs_clear_space_info_full(root->fs_info);
unlock_chunks(root);
+ root->fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures +
btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(root->fs_info);
ret = btrfs_commit_transaction(trans, root);
if (seeding_dev) {
@@ -2807,6 +2812,26 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl,
}
}
+ if (bctl->sys.flags & BTRFS_BALANCE_ARGS_CONVERT) {
+ int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures;
+ u64 target = bctl->sys.target;
+
+ num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures +
btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info);
+ if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 &&
+ (target &
+ (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0 |
+ BTRFS_AVAIL_ALLOC_BIT_SINGLE)))
+ num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 0;
+ else if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 1 &&
+ (target &
+ (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10)))
+ num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 1;
+
+ fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures +
num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures;
+ }
+
ret = insert_balance_item(fs_info->tree_root, bctl);
if (ret && ret != -EEXIST)
goto out;
@@ -2839,6 +2864,11 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl,
__cancel_balance(fs_info);
}
+ if (bctl->sys.flags & BTRFS_BALANCE_ARGS_CONVERT) {
+ fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures +
btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info);
+ }
+
wake_up(&fs_info->balance_wait_q);
return ret;
--
1.7.11.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Liu Bo
2012-Aug-11 11:58 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
)sorry, forgot to CC btrfs Maillist) On 08/11/2012 10:36 AM, Liu Bo wrote:> On 08/10/2012 09:38 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote: >> So far the return code of barrier_all_devices() is ignored, which >> means that errors are ignored. The result can be a corrupt >> filesystem which is not consistent. >> This commit adds code to evaluate the return code of >> barrier_all_devices(). The normal btrfs_error() mechanism is used to >> switch the filesystem into read-only mode when errors are detected. >> >> In order to decide whether barrier_all_devices() should return >> error or success, the number of disks that are allowed to fail the >> barrier submission is calculated. This calculation accounts for the >> worst RAID level of metadata, system and data. If single, dup or >> RAID0 is in use, a single disk error is already considered to be >> fatal. Otherwise a single disk error is tolerated. >> >> The calculation of the number of disks that are tolerated to fail >> the barrier operation is performed when the filesystem gets mounted, >> when a balance operation is started and finished, and when devices >> are added or removed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 5 +++ >> fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> fs/btrfs/disk-io.h | 2 + >> fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 8 ++-- >> fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 7 +++- >> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 30 +++++++++++++++ >> 6 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h >> index adb1cd7..af38d6d 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h >> @@ -1442,6 +1442,8 @@ struct btrfs_fs_info { >> >> /* next backup root to be overwritten */ >> int backup_root_index; >> + >> + int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; > [...] >> +int btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures( >> + struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) >> +{ >> + struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info space; >> + struct btrfs_space_info *sinfo; >> + u64 types[] = {BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA, >> + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM, >> + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA, >> + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA}; >> + int num_types = 4; >> + int i; >> + int c; >> + int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures >> + (int)fs_info->fs_devices->num_devices; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < num_types; i++) { >> + struct btrfs_space_info *tmp; >> + >> + sinfo = NULL; >> + rcu_read_lock(); >> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(tmp, &fs_info->space_info, list) { >> + if (tmp->flags == types[i]) { >> + sinfo = tmp; >> + break; >> + } >> + } >> + rcu_read_unlock(); >> + >> + if (!sinfo) >> + continue; >> + >> + down_read(&sinfo->groups_sem); >> + for (c = 0; c < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; c++) { >> + if (!list_empty(&sinfo->block_groups[c])) { >> + u64 flags; >> + >> + btrfs_get_block_group_info( >> + &sinfo->block_groups[c], &space); >> + if (space.total_bytes == 0 || >> + space.used_bytes == 0) >> + continue; >> + flags = space.flags; >> + /* >> + * return >> + * 0: if dup, single or RAID0 is configured for >> + * any of metadata, system or data, else >> + * 1: if RAID5 is configured, or if RAID1 or >> + * RAID10 is configured and only two mirrors >> + * are used, else >> + * 2: if RAID6 is configured, else >> + * num_mirrors - 1: if RAID1 or RAID10 is >> + * configured and more than >> + * 2 mirrors are used. >> + */ >> + if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 && >> + ((flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP | >> + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0)) || >> + ((flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) >> + == 0))) > > Good work. > > We already have __get_block_group_index(), for dup, single, raid0 we can do the same thing like > this: > __get_block_group_index(flags) > 1 > > the only problem is to make the function public :) > > >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 0; >> + else if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 1 >> + && >> + (flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 | >> + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10))) >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 1; >> + } >> + } >> + up_read(&sinfo->groups_sem); >> + } >> + >> + return num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; >> +} >> + >> int write_all_supers(struct btrfs_root *root, int max_mirrors) >> { >> struct list_head *head; >> @@ -2979,8 +3054,16 @@ int write_all_supers(struct btrfs_root *root, int max_mirrors) >> mutex_lock(&root->fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex); >> head = &root->fs_info->fs_devices->devices; >> >> - if (do_barriers) >> - barrier_all_devices(root->fs_info); >> + if (do_barriers) { >> + ret = barrier_all_devices(root->fs_info); >> + if (ret) { >> + mutex_unlock( >> + &root->fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex); >> + btrfs_error(root->fs_info, ret, >> + "errors while submitting device barriers."); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + } >> >> list_for_each_entry_rcu(dev, head, dev_list) { >> if (!dev->bdev) { >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h >> index c5b00a7..2025a91 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h >> @@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ struct btrfs_root *btrfs_create_tree(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> u64 objectid); >> int btree_lock_page_hook(struct page *page, void *data, >> void (*flush_fn)(void *)); >> +int btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures( >> + struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info); >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC >> void btrfs_init_lockdep(void); >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c >> index 43f0012..6cd4125 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c >> @@ -2852,8 +2852,8 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_default_subvol(struct file *file, void __user *argp) >> return 0; >> } >> >> -static void get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list, >> - struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space) >> +void btrfs_get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list, >> + struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space) >> { >> struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group; >> >> @@ -2961,8 +2961,8 @@ long btrfs_ioctl_space_info(struct btrfs_root *root, void __user *arg) >> down_read(&info->groups_sem); >> for (c = 0; c < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; c++) { >> if (!list_empty(&info->block_groups[c])) { >> - get_block_group_info(&info->block_groups[c], >> - &space); >> + btrfs_get_block_group_info( >> + &info->block_groups[c], &space); >> memcpy(dest, &space, sizeof(space)); >> dest++; >> space_args.total_spaces++; >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c >> index c86670f..c30e1c0 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c >> @@ -2171,9 +2171,12 @@ int btrfs_sync_log(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> * in and cause problems either. >> */ >> btrfs_scrub_pause_super(root); >> - write_ctree_super(trans, root->fs_info->tree_root, 1); >> + ret = write_ctree_super(trans, root->fs_info->tree_root, 1); >> btrfs_scrub_continue_super(root); >> - ret = 0; >> + if (ret) { >> + btrfs_abort_transaction(trans, root, ret); >> + goto out_wake_log_root; >> + } >> >> mutex_lock(&root->log_mutex); >> if (root->last_log_commit < log_transid) >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> index b8708f9..48ccaa4 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> @@ -1474,6 +1474,9 @@ int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_root *root, char *device_path) >> free_fs_devices(cur_devices); >> } >> >> + root->fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures >> + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(root->fs_info); >> + >> /* >> * at this point, the device is zero sized. We want to >> * remove it from the devices list and zero out the old super >> @@ -1796,6 +1799,8 @@ int btrfs_init_new_device(struct btrfs_root *root, char *device_path) >> btrfs_clear_space_info_full(root->fs_info); >> >> unlock_chunks(root); >> + root->fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures >> + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(root->fs_info); >> ret = btrfs_commit_transaction(trans, root); >> >> if (seeding_dev) { >> @@ -2807,6 +2812,26 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl, >> } >> } >> >> + if (bctl->sys.flags & BTRFS_BALANCE_ARGS_CONVERT) { >> + int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; >> + u64 target = bctl->sys.target; >> + >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures >> + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info); >> + if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 && >> + (target & >> + (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0 | >> + BTRFS_AVAIL_ALLOC_BIT_SINGLE))) > > ditto. > > thanks, > liubo > >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 0; >> + else if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 1 && >> + (target & >> + (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10))) >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 1; >> + >> + fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; >> + } >> + >> ret = insert_balance_item(fs_info->tree_root, bctl); >> if (ret && ret != -EEXIST) >> goto out; >> @@ -2839,6 +2864,11 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl, >> __cancel_balance(fs_info); >> } >> >> + if (bctl->sys.flags & BTRFS_BALANCE_ARGS_CONVERT) { >> + fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures >> + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info); >> + } >> + >> wake_up(&fs_info->balance_wait_q); >> >> return ret; >> >-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Stefan Behrens
2012-Aug-13 10:58 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 10:36:17 +0800, Liu Bo wrote:> On 08/10/2012 09:38 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote:[...]>> + flags = space.flags; >> + /* >> + * return >> + * 0: if dup, single or RAID0 is configured for >> + * any of metadata, system or data, else >> + * 1: if RAID5 is configured, or if RAID1 or >> + * RAID10 is configured and only two mirrors >> + * are used, else >> + * 2: if RAID6 is configured, else >> + * num_mirrors - 1: if RAID1 or RAID10 is >> + * configured and more than >> + * 2 mirrors are used. >> + */ >> + if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 && >> + ((flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP | >> + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0)) || >> + ((flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) >> + == 0))) > > Good work. > > We already have __get_block_group_index(), for dup, single, raid0 we can do the same thing like > this: > __get_block_group_index(flags) > 1 > > the only problem is to make the function public :)Thanks for your comments Liu Bo. And good luck with Oracle (please correct me if I misinterpreted your updated email address). That''s correct that "__get_block_group_index() > 1" would be a little bit shorter way to evaluate the RAID flags. But the rest of the btrfs code (except for btrfs_can_relocate()) also explicitly evaluates the flags instead of using the array index that __get_block_group_index() returns. It is just following the convention.>> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 0; >> + else if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 1 >> + && >> + (flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 | >> + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10))) >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 1; >> + }[...]>> @@ -2807,6 +2812,26 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl, >> } >> } >> >> + if (bctl->sys.flags & BTRFS_BALANCE_ARGS_CONVERT) { >> + int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; >> + u64 target = bctl->sys.target; >> + >> + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures >> + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info); >> + if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 && >> + (target & >> + (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0 | >> + BTRFS_AVAIL_ALLOC_BIT_SINGLE))) > > ditto.Same as before + this time the code is working on the balance conversion parameters where SINGLE is encoded in a different way. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Stefan Behrens
2012-Oct-05 08:03 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:38:35 +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:> So far the return code of barrier_all_devices() is ignored, which > means that errors are ignored. The result can be a corrupt > filesystem which is not consistent. > This commit adds code to evaluate the return code of > barrier_all_devices(). The normal btrfs_error() mechanism is used to > switch the filesystem into read-only mode when errors are detected. > > In order to decide whether barrier_all_devices() should return > error or success, the number of disks that are allowed to fail the > barrier submission is calculated. This calculation accounts for the > worst RAID level of metadata, system and data. If single, dup or > RAID0 is in use, a single disk error is already considered to be > fatal. Otherwise a single disk error is tolerated. > > The calculation of the number of disks that are tolerated to fail > the barrier operation is performed when the filesystem gets mounted, > when a balance operation is started and finished, and when devices > are added or removed. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de> > --- > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 5 +++ > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > fs/btrfs/disk-io.h | 2 + > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 8 ++-- > fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 7 +++- > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 30 +++++++++++++++ > 6 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > index adb1cd7..af38d6d 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > @@ -1442,6 +1442,8 @@ struct btrfs_fs_info { > > /* next backup root to be overwritten */ > int backup_root_index; > + > + int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; > }; > > /* > @@ -3309,6 +3311,9 @@ void btrfs_inherit_iflags(struct inode *inode, struct inode *dir); > int btrfs_defrag_file(struct inode *inode, struct file *file, > struct btrfs_ioctl_defrag_range_args *range, > u64 newer_than, unsigned long max_pages); > +void btrfs_get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list, > + struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space); > + > /* file.c */ > int btrfs_add_inode_defrag(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > struct inode *inode); > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > index f6a1d0f..b12b3b4 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > @@ -2494,6 +2494,8 @@ retry_root_backup: > printk(KERN_ERR "Failed to read block groups: %d\n", ret); > goto fail_block_groups; > } > + fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info); > > fs_info->cleaner_kthread = kthread_run(cleaner_kthread, tree_root, > "btrfs-cleaner"); > @@ -2877,12 +2879,10 @@ static int write_dev_flush(struct btrfs_device *device, int wait) > printk_in_rcu("btrfs: disabling barriers on dev %s\n", > rcu_str_deref(device->name)); > device->nobarriers = 1; > - } > - if (!bio_flagged(bio, BIO_UPTODATE)) { > + } else if (!bio_flagged(bio, BIO_UPTODATE)) { > ret = -EIO; > - if (!bio_flagged(bio, BIO_EOPNOTSUPP)) > - btrfs_dev_stat_inc_and_print(device, > - BTRFS_DEV_STAT_FLUSH_ERRS); > + btrfs_dev_stat_inc_and_print(device, > + BTRFS_DEV_STAT_FLUSH_ERRS); > } > > /* drop the reference from the wait == 0 run */ > @@ -2921,14 +2921,15 @@ static int barrier_all_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info *info) > { > struct list_head *head; > struct btrfs_device *dev; > - int errors = 0; > + int errors_send = 0; > + int errors_wait = 0; > int ret; > > /* send down all the barriers */ > head = &info->fs_devices->devices; > list_for_each_entry_rcu(dev, head, dev_list) { > if (!dev->bdev) { > - errors++; > + errors_send++; > continue; > } > if (!dev->in_fs_metadata || !dev->writeable) > @@ -2936,13 +2937,13 @@ static int barrier_all_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info *info) > > ret = write_dev_flush(dev, 0); > if (ret) > - errors++; > + errors_send++; > } > > /* wait for all the barriers */ > list_for_each_entry_rcu(dev, head, dev_list) { > if (!dev->bdev) { > - errors++; > + errors_wait++; > continue; > } > if (!dev->in_fs_metadata || !dev->writeable) > @@ -2950,13 +2951,87 @@ static int barrier_all_devices(struct btrfs_fs_info *info) > > ret = write_dev_flush(dev, 1); > if (ret) > - errors++; > + errors_wait++; > } > - if (errors) > + if (errors_send > info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures || > + errors_wait > info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures) > return -EIO; > return 0; > } > > +int btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures( > + struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) > +{ > + struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info space; > + struct btrfs_space_info *sinfo; > + u64 types[] = {BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA, > + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_SYSTEM, > + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA, > + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_METADATA}; > + int num_types = 4; > + int i; > + int c; > + int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > + (int)fs_info->fs_devices->num_devices; > + > + for (i = 0; i < num_types; i++) { > + struct btrfs_space_info *tmp; > + > + sinfo = NULL; > + rcu_read_lock(); > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(tmp, &fs_info->space_info, list) { > + if (tmp->flags == types[i]) { > + sinfo = tmp; > + break; > + } > + } > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + > + if (!sinfo) > + continue; > + > + down_read(&sinfo->groups_sem); > + for (c = 0; c < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; c++) { > + if (!list_empty(&sinfo->block_groups[c])) { > + u64 flags; > + > + btrfs_get_block_group_info( > + &sinfo->block_groups[c], &space); > + if (space.total_bytes == 0 || > + space.used_bytes == 0) > + continue; > + flags = space.flags; > + /* > + * return > + * 0: if dup, single or RAID0 is configured for > + * any of metadata, system or data, else > + * 1: if RAID5 is configured, or if RAID1 or > + * RAID10 is configured and only two mirrors > + * are used, else > + * 2: if RAID6 is configured, else > + * num_mirrors - 1: if RAID1 or RAID10 is > + * configured and more than > + * 2 mirrors are used. > + */ > + if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 && > + ((flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP | > + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0)) || > + ((flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) > + == 0))) > + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 0; > + else if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 1 > + && > + (flags & (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 | > + BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10))) > + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 1; > + } > + } > + up_read(&sinfo->groups_sem); > + } > + > + return num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; > +} > + > int write_all_supers(struct btrfs_root *root, int max_mirrors) > { > struct list_head *head; > @@ -2979,8 +3054,16 @@ int write_all_supers(struct btrfs_root *root, int max_mirrors) > mutex_lock(&root->fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex); > head = &root->fs_info->fs_devices->devices; > > - if (do_barriers) > - barrier_all_devices(root->fs_info); > + if (do_barriers) { > + ret = barrier_all_devices(root->fs_info); > + if (ret) { > + mutex_unlock( > + &root->fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex); > + btrfs_error(root->fs_info, ret, > + "errors while submitting device barriers."); > + return ret; > + } > + } > > list_for_each_entry_rcu(dev, head, dev_list) { > if (!dev->bdev) { > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h > index c5b00a7..2025a91 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h > +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.h > @@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ struct btrfs_root *btrfs_create_tree(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > u64 objectid); > int btree_lock_page_hook(struct page *page, void *data, > void (*flush_fn)(void *)); > +int btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures( > + struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info); > > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC > void btrfs_init_lockdep(void); > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > index 43f0012..6cd4125 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > @@ -2852,8 +2852,8 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_default_subvol(struct file *file, void __user *argp) > return 0; > } > > -static void get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list, > - struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space) > +void btrfs_get_block_group_info(struct list_head *groups_list, > + struct btrfs_ioctl_space_info *space) > { > struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group; > > @@ -2961,8 +2961,8 @@ long btrfs_ioctl_space_info(struct btrfs_root *root, void __user *arg) > down_read(&info->groups_sem); > for (c = 0; c < BTRFS_NR_RAID_TYPES; c++) { > if (!list_empty(&info->block_groups[c])) { > - get_block_group_info(&info->block_groups[c], > - &space); > + btrfs_get_block_group_info( > + &info->block_groups[c], &space); > memcpy(dest, &space, sizeof(space)); > dest++; > space_args.total_spaces++; > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c > index c86670f..c30e1c0 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c > @@ -2171,9 +2171,12 @@ int btrfs_sync_log(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > * in and cause problems either. > */ > btrfs_scrub_pause_super(root); > - write_ctree_super(trans, root->fs_info->tree_root, 1); > + ret = write_ctree_super(trans, root->fs_info->tree_root, 1); > btrfs_scrub_continue_super(root); > - ret = 0; > + if (ret) { > + btrfs_abort_transaction(trans, root, ret); > + goto out_wake_log_root; > + } > > mutex_lock(&root->log_mutex); > if (root->last_log_commit < log_transid) > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > index b8708f9..48ccaa4 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > @@ -1474,6 +1474,9 @@ int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_root *root, char *device_path) > free_fs_devices(cur_devices); > } > > + root->fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(root->fs_info); > + > /* > * at this point, the device is zero sized. We want to > * remove it from the devices list and zero out the old super > @@ -1796,6 +1799,8 @@ int btrfs_init_new_device(struct btrfs_root *root, char *device_path) > btrfs_clear_space_info_full(root->fs_info); > > unlock_chunks(root); > + root->fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(root->fs_info); > ret = btrfs_commit_transaction(trans, root); > > if (seeding_dev) { > @@ -2807,6 +2812,26 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl, > } > } > > + if (bctl->sys.flags & BTRFS_BALANCE_ARGS_CONVERT) { > + int num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; > + u64 target = bctl->sys.target; > + > + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info); > + if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 0 && > + (target & > + (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DUP | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0 | > + BTRFS_AVAIL_ALLOC_BIT_SINGLE))) > + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 0; > + else if (num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > 1 && > + (target & > + (BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID1 | BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10))) > + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures = 1; > + > + fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > + num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures; > + } > + > ret = insert_balance_item(fs_info->tree_root, bctl); > if (ret && ret != -EEXIST) > goto out; > @@ -2839,6 +2864,11 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl, > __cancel_balance(fs_info); > } > > + if (bctl->sys.flags & BTRFS_BALANCE_ARGS_CONVERT) { > + fs_info->num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures > + btrfs_calc_num_tolerated_disk_barrier_failures(fs_info); > + } > + > wake_up(&fs_info->balance_wait_q); > > return ret; >Hi Liu Bo, Do you think this patch can be added to btrfs-next now? You gave feedback to the patch at that time, and I answered to your comments. Now would be the chance to add this patch to the initial 3.7 pull request. Such errors that can happen during submission of barriers are also counted in the device stats in the "flush" counter. A kernel log message is printed on each occurrence, here is one example: btrfs: bdev /dev/dm-6 errs: wr 1490, rd 0, flush 18, corrupt 0, gen 0 So far I noticed twice (from people on #btrfs and on the mailing list) that the flush counter was non-zero. One case was with an USB device that sometimes lost the connection. The second case was reported with message ID <20120921041113.GA9170@merlins.org> on linux-btrfs, the disk was broken and went offline. In both cases the device counter for write errors was also greater than zero. Switching the filesystem to read-only mode immediately would have been correct in both case unless the configured RAID level allows a single disk failure. And the patch considers the number of tolerated disk failures before it declares barrier failures as an critical error that requires to switch the filesystem to read-only mode. The goal is to avoid inconsistent filesystem states that cause mount failures and data loss. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Josef Bacik
2012-Oct-05 12:51 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 07:38:35AM -0600, Stefan Behrens wrote:> So far the return code of barrier_all_devices() is ignored, which > means that errors are ignored. The result can be a corrupt > filesystem which is not consistent. > This commit adds code to evaluate the return code of > barrier_all_devices(). The normal btrfs_error() mechanism is used to > switch the filesystem into read-only mode when errors are detected. > > In order to decide whether barrier_all_devices() should return > error or success, the number of disks that are allowed to fail the > barrier submission is calculated. This calculation accounts for the > worst RAID level of metadata, system and data. If single, dup or > RAID0 is in use, a single disk error is already considered to be > fatal. Otherwise a single disk error is tolerated. > > The calculation of the number of disks that are tolerated to fail > the barrier operation is performed when the filesystem gets mounted, > when a balance operation is started and finished, and when devices > are added or removed. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de>So we''re going from EOPNOTSUPP resulting in barriers just being turned off to the file system being mounted read only? This is not inline with what every other linux file system does, which isn''t necessarily a problem but I''m not sure it''s the kind of change we want to make. Think about somebody formatting a cheap usb stick as btrfs and not understanding why they can''t write to it. I''m fine either way, I just want to make sure that we think about the consequences of this before we pull it in. Thanks, Josef -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Chris Mason
2012-Oct-05 13:09 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 06:51:59AM -0600, Josef Bacik wrote:> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 07:38:35AM -0600, Stefan Behrens wrote: > > So far the return code of barrier_all_devices() is ignored, which > > means that errors are ignored. The result can be a corrupt > > filesystem which is not consistent. > > This commit adds code to evaluate the return code of > > barrier_all_devices(). The normal btrfs_error() mechanism is used to > > switch the filesystem into read-only mode when errors are detected. > > > > In order to decide whether barrier_all_devices() should return > > error or success, the number of disks that are allowed to fail the > > barrier submission is calculated. This calculation accounts for the > > worst RAID level of metadata, system and data. If single, dup or > > RAID0 is in use, a single disk error is already considered to be > > fatal. Otherwise a single disk error is tolerated. > > > > The calculation of the number of disks that are tolerated to fail > > the barrier operation is performed when the filesystem gets mounted, > > when a balance operation is started and finished, and when devices > > are added or removed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de> > > So we''re going from EOPNOTSUPP resulting in barriers just being turned off to > the file system being mounted read only? This is not inline with what every > other linux file system does, which isn''t necessarily a problem but I''m not sure > it''s the kind of change we want to make. Think about somebody formatting a > cheap usb stick as btrfs and not understanding why they can''t write to it. I''m > fine either way, I just want to make sure that we think about the consequences > of this before we pull it in. Thanks,In the past I haven''t really trusted the drives to return good errors when there are problems with cache flushes. It might be that drives (and the block layer) are really smart about this now, I know that Christoph thought any EIOs coming up from a barrier really were eios. But I still have my doubts, mostly because I don''t think anyone tests these conditions on a regular basis. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Stefan Behrens
2012-Oct-05 14:05 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 09:09:11 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:> On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 06:51:59AM -0600, Josef Bacik wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 07:38:35AM -0600, Stefan Behrens wrote: >>> So far the return code of barrier_all_devices() is ignored, which >>> means that errors are ignored. The result can be a corrupt >>> filesystem which is not consistent. >>> This commit adds code to evaluate the return code of >>> barrier_all_devices(). The normal btrfs_error() mechanism is used to >>> switch the filesystem into read-only mode when errors are detected. >>> >>> In order to decide whether barrier_all_devices() should return >>> error or success, the number of disks that are allowed to fail the >>> barrier submission is calculated. This calculation accounts for the >>> worst RAID level of metadata, system and data. If single, dup or >>> RAID0 is in use, a single disk error is already considered to be >>> fatal. Otherwise a single disk error is tolerated. >>> >>> The calculation of the number of disks that are tolerated to fail >>> the barrier operation is performed when the filesystem gets mounted, >>> when a balance operation is started and finished, and when devices >>> are added or removed. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de> >> >> So we''re going from EOPNOTSUPP resulting in barriers just being turned off to >> the file system being mounted read only? This is not inline with what every >> other linux file system does, which isn''t necessarily a problem but I''m not sure >> it''s the kind of change we want to make. Think about somebody formatting a >> cheap usb stick as btrfs and not understanding why they can''t write to it. I''m >> fine either way, I just want to make sure that we think about the consequences >> of this before we pull it in. Thanks,(Just for the matter of completeness: A few minutes ago Josef agreed on IRC that this is not the case, EOPNOTSUPP is not seen as an error.)> > In the past I haven''t really trusted the drives to return good errors > when there are problems with cache flushes. It might be that drives > (and the block layer) are really smart about this now, I know that > Christoph thought any EIOs coming up from a barrier really were eios. > > But I still have my doubts, mostly because I don''t think anyone tests > these conditions on a regular basis.Looking at the risk of this patch, the worst thing that can happen is that a flush request results in an EIO although there is no error at all. Then the filesystem is switched read-only and the user is not amused. All I can say is that I have not seen this so far, which does not mean that it cannot happen. But I have seen two cases (on IRC and on mailing list) where drives that transitioned to offline caused flush errors and write errors. When we ignore the flush errors, the super blocks referring to the new tree roots are written to those disks that are still online, and the state of the filesystem is not correct. The trees refer to data that is not on disk (since it is not flushed and the write EOIs can be delayed since we''re talking of hardware issues like hot unplugged USB drives). In this case, the user is not amused as well. And additionally, he needs to go back to a previous tree root revision which can mean to lose data. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Chris Mason
2012-Oct-05 14:50 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: make filesystem read-only when submitting barrier fails
[ Adding Jens to the cc ] Jens, we have a proposed patch for btrfs to treat EIO errors on cache flushes as fatal events (forcing the FS to readonly). It really seems like the right idea, except for the part where we trust the devices to only return EIOs on cache flushes when things went horribly wrong. Can you see any reason for EIOs to come back from cache flushes when we might not want to declare a metadata emergency? [ more context below ] -chris On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 08:05:13AM -0600, Stefan Behrens wrote:> On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 09:09:11 -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 06:51:59AM -0600, Josef Bacik wrote: > >> > >> So we''re going from EOPNOTSUPP resulting in barriers just being turned off to > >> the file system being mounted read only? This is not inline with what every > >> other linux file system does, which isn''t necessarily a problem but I''m not sure > >> it''s the kind of change we want to make. Think about somebody formatting a > >> cheap usb stick as btrfs and not understanding why they can''t write to it. I''m > >> fine either way, I just want to make sure that we think about the consequences > >> of this before we pull it in. Thanks, > > (Just for the matter of completeness: A few minutes ago Josef agreed on > IRC that this is not the case, EOPNOTSUPP is not seen as an error.) > > > > > In the past I haven''t really trusted the drives to return good errors > > when there are problems with cache flushes. It might be that drives > > (and the block layer) are really smart about this now, I know that > > Christoph thought any EIOs coming up from a barrier really were eios. > > > > But I still have my doubts, mostly because I don''t think anyone tests > > these conditions on a regular basis. > > Looking at the risk of this patch, the worst thing that can happen is > that a flush request results in an EIO although there is no error at > all. Then the filesystem is switched read-only and the user is not > amused. All I can say is that I have not seen this so far, which does > not mean that it cannot happen. > > But I have seen two cases (on IRC and on mailing list) where drives that > transitioned to offline caused flush errors and write errors. When we > ignore the flush errors, the super blocks referring to the new tree > roots are written to those disks that are still online, and the state of > the filesystem is not correct. The trees refer to data that is not on > disk (since it is not flushed and the write EOIs can be delayed since > we''re talking of hardware issues like hot unplugged USB drives). In this > case, the user is not amused as well. And additionally, he needs to go > back to a previous tree root revision which can mean to lose data.Jens -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html