Linux-Fsdevel Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.com>,
	Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>,
	David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
	"linux-btrfs @ vger . kernel . org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	Filipe Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com>,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] btrfs: don't call btrfs_sync_file from iomap context
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 16:29:23 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200917062923.GV12096@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200917055232.GA31646@lst.de>

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 07:52:32AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 01:09:42PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > iomap_dio_complete()
> > > >   generic_write_sync()
> > > >     btrfs_file_fsync()
> > > >       inode_lock()
> > > >       <deadlock>
> > > 
> > > Can inode_dio_end() be called before generic_write_sync(), as it is done
> > > in fs/direct-io.c:dio_complete()?
> > 
> > Don't think so.  inode_dio_wait() is supposed to indicate that all
> > DIO is complete, and having the "make it stable" parts of an O_DSYNC
> > DIO still running after inode_dio_wait() returns means that we still
> > have DIO running....
> > 
> > For some filesystems, ensuring the DIO data is stable may involve
> > flushing other data (perhaps we did EOF zeroing before the file
> > extending DIO) and/or metadata to the log, so we need to guarantee
> > these DIO related operations are complete and stable before we say
> > the DIO is done.
> 
> inode_dio_wait really just waits for active I/O that writes to or reads
> from the file.  It does not imply that the I/O is stable, just like
> i_rwsem itself doesn't.

No, but iomap_dio_rw() considers a O_DSYNC write to be incomplete
until it is stable so that it presents consistent behaviour to
anythign calling inode_dio_wait().

> Various file systems have historically called
> the syncing outside i_rwsem and inode_dio_wait (in fact that is what the
> fs/direct-io.c code does, so XFS did as well until a few years ago), and
> that isn't a problem at all - we just can't return to userspace (or call
> ki_complete for in-kernel users) before the data is stable on disk.

I'm really not caring about userspace here - we use inode_dio_wait()
as an IO completion notification for the purposes of synchronising
internal filesystem state before modifying user data via direct
metadata manipulation. Hence I want sane, consistent, predictable IO
completion notification behaviour regardless of the implementation
path it goes through.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  reply	other threads:[~2020-09-17  6:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20200901130644.12655-1-johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
2020-09-01 15:11 ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-01 17:45   ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-09-01 17:55     ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-01 21:46   ` Dave Chinner
2020-09-01 22:19     ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-01 23:58       ` Dave Chinner
2020-09-02  0:22         ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-02  7:12           ` Johannes Thumshirn
2020-09-02 11:10             ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-02 16:29               ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-09-02 16:47                 ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-02 11:44         ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-09-02 12:20           ` Dave Chinner
2020-09-02 12:42             ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-03  2:28               ` Dave Chinner
2020-09-03  9:49                 ` Filipe Manana
2020-09-03 16:32   ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-09-03 16:46     ` Josef Bacik
2020-09-07  0:04     ` Dave Chinner
2020-09-15 21:48       ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2020-09-17  3:09         ` Dave Chinner
2020-09-17  5:52           ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-09-17  6:29             ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2020-09-17  6:42               ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200917062923.GV12096@dread.disaster.area \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=fdmanana@gmail.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rgoldwyn@suse.com \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH] btrfs: don'\''t call btrfs_sync_file from iomap context' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).