Re: [PATCH/RFC] btrfs: fix folio lock leak in writepage_delalloc() for folios dirtied behind btrfs' back

[Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>]

在 2026/7/22 22:27, Matthew Wilcox 写道:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 11:29:36AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>   *   4. Thread B loops sync_file_range(WRITE|WAIT) on the target file.
>>   *      Whenever a full clean cycle (clear_page_dirty_for_io(),
>>   *      writeback, bits cleared) completes inside thread A's
>>   *      submission->completion window, the completion-time
>>   *      set_page_dirty_lock() hits a *clean* folio: filemap_dirty_folio()
>>   *      sets only the folio flag and the xarray tag - no btrfs subpage
>>   *      dirty bit, no delalloc reservation.  See the 20-year-old comment
>>   *      above bio_set_pages_dirty() in block/bio.c describing exactly
>>   *      this ("other code (eg, flusher threads) could clean the pages").
> 
> There's your problem.  filemap_dirty_folio() documents that btrfs is
> doing it wrongly:
> 
>   * Filesystems which do not use buffer heads should call this function
>   * from their dirty_folio address space operation.  It ignores the
>   * contents of folio_get_private(), so if the filesystem marks individual
>   * blocks as dirty, the filesystem should handle that itself.
> 
> fs/btrfs/inode.c:       .dirty_folio    = filemap_dirty_folio,
> 
> so btrfs should have its own btrfs_dirty_folio() which does whatever
> metadata updates it needs to and then call filemap_dirty_folio() to
> take care of the page cache business.  See iomap_dirty_folio() as
> an example, but many other filesystems also do this.

Thanks a lot for the advice.

However it looks like the sub-folio dirty block tracking is a little 
different between iomap and btrfs.

E.g. iomap will mark the full folio range dirty even if the EOF is 
inside the folio, but btrfs will only mark the range inside EOF as dirty.


Another thing is, even if we follow iomap to mark the full folio dirty, 
it's still not the end of the story.

We have other supporting mechanisms required to tracking the dirty 
range. E.g. EXTENT_DELALLOC flags inside extent-io-tree, indicating we 
have already reserved space for the dirty range.

Only with EXTENT_DELALLOC flag set, we will do the real delayed 
allocation, allocating the on-disk extents etc.

So even if we always mark the full folio dirty, the writeback path will 
not handle them correctly either.


Finally, even without large folios, the reproducer can already cause 
problems on btrfs. E.g. on x86_64, with mapping_set_folio_order_range() 
disabled.

The symptom there is that, ordered extent accounting underflows, which 
may also contribute to the stall observed.

I'll keep digging for this bug.

Thanks,
Qu