From: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
To: dsterba@suse.cz, Aditya Pakki <pakki001@umn.edu>,
kjlu@umn.edu, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: remove BUG_ON used as assertions
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 14:54:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57ffdc3b-59c7-66d4-8e55-909ad4710f5f@toxicpanda.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191218164706.GP3929@twin.jikos.cz>
On 12/18/19 11:47 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 11:38:18AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> On 12/15/19 12:12 PM, Aditya Pakki wrote:
>>> alloc_extent_state_atomic() allocates extents via GFP_ATOMIC flag
>>> and cannot fail. There are multiple invocations of BUG_ON on the
>>> return value to check for failure. The patch replaces certain
>>> invocations of BUG_ON by returning the error upstream.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Aditya Pakki <pakki001@umn.edu>
>>
>> I already tried this a few months ago and gave up. There are a few things if
>> you want to tackle something like this
>>
>> 1) use bpf's error injection thing to make sure you handle every path that can
>> error out. This is the script I wrote to do just that
>>
>> https://github.com/josefbacik/debug-scripts/blob/master/error-injection-stress.py
>>
>> 2) We actually can't fail here. We would need to go back and make _all_ callers
>> of lock_extent_bits() handle the allocation error. This is theoretically
>> possible, but a giant pain in the ass. In general we can make allocations here
>> and we need to be able to make them.
>>
>> 3) We should probably mark this path with __GFP_NOFAIL because again, this is
>> locking and we need locking to succeed.
>
> NOFAIL can introduce loops that could lead to deadlocks, if not used
> carefully. __set_extent_bit is not just locking, so if one thread wants
> to set bits, allocate, wait, allocator goes to write some memory
>
> eg.
>
> set_extent_bit on some range
> alloc state (NOFAIL)
> allocator wants to flush dome dirty data
> ------------------------------>
> set_extent_bit
> alloc state (NOFAIL)
> (wait)
>
Yes obviously I just want it for EXTENT_LOCKED. But we could even just use a
mempool to be really safe, since most places are going to use GFP_KERNEL or
something else related, we only really need the safety in a few critical areas.
Thanks,
Josef
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-18 19:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-15 17:12 Aditya Pakki
2019-12-15 17:42 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-12-18 16:31 ` David Sterba
2019-12-18 16:38 ` Josef Bacik
2019-12-18 16:47 ` David Sterba
2019-12-18 19:54 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
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=57ffdc3b-59c7-66d4-8e55-909ad4710f5f@toxicpanda.com \
--to=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=kjlu@umn.edu \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pakki001@umn.edu \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®