You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
btrfs: fix the incorrect max_bytes value for find_lock_delalloc_range()
[ Upstream commit 7b26da4 ]
[BUG]
With my local branch to enable bs > ps support for btrfs, sometimes I
hit the following ASSERT() inside submit_one_sector():
ASSERT(block_start != EXTENT_MAP_HOLE);
Please note that it's not yet possible to hit this ASSERT() in the wild
yet, as it requires btrfs bs > ps support, which is not even in the
development branch.
But on the other hand, there is also a very low chance to hit above
ASSERT() with bs < ps cases, so this is an existing bug affect not only
the incoming bs > ps support but also the existing bs < ps support.
[CAUSE]
Firstly that ASSERT() means we're trying to submit a dirty block but
without a real extent map nor ordered extent map backing it.
Furthermore with extra debugging, the folio triggering such ASSERT() is
always larger than the fs block size in my bs > ps case.
(8K block size, 4K page size)
After some more debugging, the ASSERT() is trigger by the following
sequence:
extent_writepage()
| We got a 32K folio (4 fs blocks) at file offset 0, and the fs block
| size is 8K, page size is 4K.
| And there is another 8K folio at file offset 32K, which is also
| dirty.
| So the filemap layout looks like the following:
|
| "||" is the filio boundary in the filemap.
| "//| is the dirty range.
|
| 0 8K 16K 24K 32K 40K
| |////////| |//////////////////////||////////|
|
|- writepage_delalloc()
| |- find_lock_delalloc_range() for [0, 8K)
| | Now range [0, 8K) is properly locked.
| |
| |- find_lock_delalloc_range() for [16K, 40K)
| | |- btrfs_find_delalloc_range() returned range [16K, 40K)
| | |- lock_delalloc_folios() locked folio 0 successfully
| | |
| | | The filemap range [32K, 40K) got dropped from filemap.
| | |
| | |- lock_delalloc_folios() failed with -EAGAIN on folio 32K
| | | As the folio at 32K is dropped.
| | |
| | |- loops = 1;
| | |- max_bytes = PAGE_SIZE;
| | |- goto again;
| | | This will re-do the lookup for dirty delalloc ranges.
| | |
| | |- btrfs_find_delalloc_range() called with @max_bytes == 4K
| | | This is smaller than block size, so
| | | btrfs_find_delalloc_range() is unable to return any range.
| | \- return false;
| |
| \- Now only range [0, 8K) has an OE for it, but for dirty range
| [16K, 32K) it's dirty without an OE.
| This breaks the assumption that writepage_delalloc() will find
| and lock all dirty ranges inside the folio.
|
|- extent_writepage_io()
|- submit_one_sector() for [0, 8K)
| Succeeded
|
|- submit_one_sector() for [16K, 24K)
Triggering the ASSERT(), as there is no OE, and the original
extent map is a hole.
Please note that, this also exposed the same problem for bs < ps
support. E.g. with 64K page size and 4K block size.
If we failed to lock a folio, and falls back into the "loops = 1;"
branch, we will re-do the search using 64K as max_bytes.
Which may fail again to lock the next folio, and exit early without
handling all dirty blocks inside the folio.
[FIX]
Instead of using the fixed size PAGE_SIZE as @max_bytes, use
@sectorsize, so that we are ensured to find and lock any remaining
blocks inside the folio.
And since we're here, add an extra ASSERT() to
before calling btrfs_find_delalloc_range() to make sure the @max_bytes is
at least no smaller than a block to avoid false negative.
Cc: [email protected] # 5.15+
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
0 commit comments