Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 23 Apr 2015 13:14:40 -0400 | From | Waiman Long <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] xfs: call xfs_idestroy_fork() in xfs_ilock() critical section |
| |
On 04/22/2015 07:17 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com > > xfs: xfs_attr_inactive leaves inconsistent attr fork state behind > > From: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com> > > xfs_attr_inactive() is supposed to clean up the attribute fork when > the inode is being freed. While it removes attribute fork extents, > it completely ignores attributes in local format, which means that > there can still be active attributes on the inode after > xfs_attr_inactive() has run. > > This leads to problems with concurrent inode writeback - the in-core > inode attribute fork is removed without locking on the assumption > that nothing will be attempting to access the attribute fork after a > call to xfs_attr_inactive() because it isn't supposed to exist on > disk any more. > > To fix this, make xfs_attr_inactive() completely remove all traces > of the attribute fork from the inode, regardless of it's state. > Further, also remove the in-core attribute fork structure safely so > that there is nothing further that needs to be done by callers to > clean up the attribute fork. This means we can remove the in-core > and on-disk attribute forks atomically. > > Also, on error simply remove the in-memory attribute fork. There's > nothing that can be done with it once we have failed to remove the > on-disk attribute fork, so we may as well just blow it away here > anyway. > > cc:<stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.12 to 4.0 > Reported-by: Waiman Long<waiman.long@hp.com> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com> > --- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_leaf.c | 2 +- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_leaf.h | 2 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_attr_inactive.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 12 +++---- > 4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
Thanks for figuring out a better way to fix the underlying problem. I tested it in my test machine and it did fix the errors that I had seen in my test case.
Tested-by: Waiman Long<Waiman.Long@hp.com>
Cheers, Longman
| |