On 07/26/2016 08:04 AM, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
cleaner_kthread() may run at any time, in which it'll call btrfs_delete_unused_bgs()
to delete unused block groups. Because this work is asynchronous, it may also result
in false ENOSPC error. Please see below race window:
CPU1 | CPU2
|
|-> btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand() |-> cleaner_kthread()
|-> do_chunk_alloc() | |
| assume it returns ENOSPC, which means | |
| btrfs_space_info is full and have free| |
| space to satisfy data request. | |
| | |- > btrfs_delete_unused_bgs()
| | | it will decrease btrfs_space_info
| | | total_bytes and make
| | | btrfs_space_info is not full.
| | |
In this case, we may get ENOSPC error, but btrfs_space_info is not full.
To fix this issue, in btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand(), if we need to call
do_chunk_alloc() to allocating new chunk, we should block btrfs_delete_unused_bgs().
So here we introduce a new struct rw_semaphore bg_delete_sem to do this job.
Signed-off-by: Wang Xiaoguang <wangxg.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
v3: improve one code logic suggested by Josef, thanks.
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 +
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 1 +
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
index 7eb2913..bf0751d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
@@ -800,6 +800,7 @@ struct btrfs_fs_info {
struct mutex cleaner_mutex;
struct mutex chunk_mutex;
struct mutex volume_mutex;
+ struct rw_semaphore bg_delete_sem;
/*
* this is taken to make sure we don't set block groups ro after
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index 60ce119..f8609fd 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
@@ -2683,6 +2683,7 @@ int open_ctree(struct super_block *sb,
init_rwsem(&fs_info->commit_root_sem);
init_rwsem(&fs_info->cleanup_work_sem);
init_rwsem(&fs_info->subvol_sem);
+ init_rwsem(&fs_info->bg_delete_sem);
sema_init(&fs_info->uuid_tree_rescan_sem, 1);
btrfs_init_dev_replace_locks(fs_info);
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index df8d756..50b440e 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -4111,6 +4111,7 @@ int btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand(struct inode *inode, u64 bytes)
int ret = 0;
int need_commit = 2;
int have_pinned_space;
+ int have_bg_delete_sem = 0;
/* make sure bytes are sectorsize aligned */
bytes = ALIGN(bytes, root->sectorsize);
@@ -4121,8 +4122,11 @@ int btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand(struct inode *inode, u64 bytes)
}
data_sinfo = fs_info->data_sinfo;
- if (!data_sinfo)
+ if (!data_sinfo) {
+ down_read(&root->fs_info->bg_delete_sem);
+ have_bg_delete_sem = 1;
goto alloc;
+ }
again:
/* make sure we have enough space to handle the data first */
@@ -4135,6 +4139,19 @@ again:
struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
/*
+ * We may need to allocate new chunk, so we should block
+ * btrfs_delete_unused_bgs()
+ */
+ if (!have_bg_delete_sem) {
+ spin_unlock(&data_sinfo->lock);
+ down_read(&root->fs_info->bg_delete_sem);
+ have_bg_delete_sem = 1;
+ spin_lock(&data_sinfo->lock);
+ if (used + bytes <= data_sinfo->total_bytes)
Doh sorry I forgot to mention you need to re-calculate used here. Also I
noticed we already have a delete_unused_bgs_mutex, can we drop that and replace
it with bg_delete_sem as well? Thanks,
Josef
--
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
