On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:05:10 -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 08:18:35PM -0600, Miao Xie wrote: >> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:34:23 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 09:35:08PM -0600, Miao Xie wrote: >>>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:42:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: >>>>> From: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> Miao pointed out there's a problem with mixing dio writes and buffered >>>>> reads. If the read happens between us invalidating the page range and >>>>> actually locking the extent we can bring in pages into page cache. Then >>>>> once the write finishes if somebody tries to read again it will just find >>>>> uptodate pages and we'll read stale data. So we need to lock the extent and >>>>> check for uptodate bits in the range. If there are uptodate bits we need to >>>>> unlock and invalidate again. This will keep this race from happening since >>>>> we will hold the extent locked until we create the ordered extent, and then >>>>> teh read side always waits for ordered extents. Thanks, >>>> >>>> This patch still can not work well. It is because we don't update i_size in time. >>>> Writer Worker Reader >>>> lock_extent >>>> do direct io >>>> end io >>>> finish io >>>> unlock_extent >>>> lock_extent >>>> check the pos is beyond EOF or not >>>> beyond EOF, zero the page and set it uptodate >>>> unlock_extent >>>> update i_size >>>> >>>> So I think we must update the i_size in time, and I wrote a small patch to do it: >>>> >>> >>> We should probably be updating i_size when we create an extent past EOF in the >>> write stuff, not during endio, I will work this out and fold it into my patch. >>> Good catch. >> >> It is better that update i_size in endio, I think. because during endio, we are sure that >> the data is flushed into the disk successfully, and can update i_size at ease. and if the >> error happens when flushing the data into the disk, we also needn't reset i_size. > > I think the i_size update should happen sooner. The rest of the > filesystems work that way, and it will have fewer interaction problems > with the VM. Thanks for your explanation. Regards Miao -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
