lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/2] fuse: Fix possible deadlock when writing back dirty pages
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:22 AM Baolin Wang
<baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 在 2021/4/14 17:02, Miklos Szeredi 写道:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:42 AM Baolin Wang
> > <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry I missed this patch before, and I've tested this patch, it seems
> >> can solve the deadlock issue I met before.
> >
> > Great, thanks for testing.
> >
> >> But look at this patch in detail, I think this patch only reduced the
> >> deadlock window, but did not remove the possible deadlock scenario
> >> completely like I explained in the commit log.
> >>
> >> Since the fuse_fill_write_pages() can still lock the partitail page in
> >> your patch, and will be wait for the partitail page waritehack is
> >> completed if writeback is set in fuse_send_write_pages().
> >>
> >> But at the same time, a writeback worker thread may be waiting for
> >> trying to lock the partitail page to write a bunch of dirty pages by
> >> fuse_writepages().
> >
> > As you say, fuse_fill_write_pages() will lock a partial page. This
> > page cannot become dirty, only after being read completely, which
> > first requires the page lock. So dirtying this page can only happen
> > after the writeback of the fragment was completed.
>
> What I mean is the writeback worker had looked up the dirty pages in
> write_cache_pages() and stored them into a temporary pagevec, then try
> to lock dirty page one by one and write them.
>
> For example, suppose it looked up 2 dirty pages (named page 1 and page
> 2), and writed down page 1 by fuse_writepages_fill(), unlocked page 1.
> Then try to lock page 2.
>
> At the same time, suppose the fuse_fill_write_pages() will write the
> same page 1 and partitail page 2, and it will lock partital page 2 and
> wait for the page 1's writeback is completed. But page 1's writeback can
> not be completed, since the writeback worker is waiting for locking page
> 2, which was already locked by fuse_fill_write_pages().

How would page2 become not uptodate, when it was already collected by
write_cache_pages()? I.e. page2 is a dirty page, hence it must be
uptodate, and fuse_writepages_fill() will not keep it locked.

Your patch may make sense regardless, but it needs to have a clear
analysis about why the fuse_wait_on_page_writeback() was needed in
the first place (it's not clear from the history) or why it's okay to
move it.

Thanks,
Miklos

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-14 11:49    [W:0.090 / U:0.488 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site