From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christian Theune <ct@flyingcircus.io>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, Chris Mason <clm@meta.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-mm@kvack.org,
"linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Daniel Dao <dqminh@cloudflare.com>,
regressions@lists.linux.dev, regressions@leemhuis.info
Subject: Re: Known and unfixed active data loss bug in MM + XFS with large folios since Dec 2021 (any kernel from 6.1 upwards)
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 12:22:59 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZvtdA2A8Ub9v5v3a@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <02121707-E630-4E7E-837B-8F53B4C28721@flyingcircus.io>
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 07:34:39PM +0200, Christian Theune wrote:
> Hi,
>
> we’ve been running a number of VMs since last week on 6.11. We’ve
> encountered one hung task situation multiple times now that seems
> to be resolving itself after a bit of time, though. I do not see
> spinning CPU during this time.
>
> The situation seems to be related to cgroups-based IO throttling /
> weighting so far:
.....
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: INFO: task nix-build:94696 blocked for more than 122 seconds.
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: Not tainted 6.11.0 #1-NixOS
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: task:nix-build state:D stack:0 pid:94696 tgid:94696 ppid:94695 flags:0x00000002
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: Call Trace:
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: <TASK>
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: __schedule+0x3a3/0x1300
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: schedule+0x27/0xf0
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: io_schedule+0x46/0x70
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: folio_wait_bit_common+0x13f/0x340
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: folio_wait_writeback+0x2b/0x80
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: truncate_inode_partial_folio+0x5e/0x1b0
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: truncate_inode_pages_range+0x1de/0x400
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: evict+0x29f/0x2c0
> Sep 28 03:39:19 <redactedhostname>10 kernel: do_unlinkat+0x2de/0x330
That's not what I'd call expected behaviour.
By the time we are that far through eviction of a newly unlinked
inode, we've already removed the inode from the writeback lists and
we've supposedly waited for all writeback to complete.
IOWs, there shouldn't be a cached folio in writeback state at this
point in time - we're supposed to have guaranteed all writeback has
already compelted before we call truncate_inode_pages_final()....
So how are we getting a partial folio that is still under writeback
at this point in time?
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-01 2:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 81+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-12 21:18 Christian Theune
2024-09-12 21:55 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-12 22:11 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-12 22:12 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-12 22:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-12 22:30 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-12 22:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-13 3:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-13 13:23 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-13 12:11 ` Christian Brauner
2024-09-16 13:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-18 9:51 ` Christian Brauner
2024-09-13 15:30 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-13 15:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-13 16:33 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-13 18:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-13 21:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-13 21:30 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-13 16:04 ` David Howells
2024-09-13 16:37 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-16 0:00 ` Dave Chinner
2024-09-16 4:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-16 8:47 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-17 9:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-17 9:36 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-17 10:11 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-17 11:13 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-17 13:25 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-18 6:37 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-18 9:28 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-18 12:23 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-18 13:34 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-18 13:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-18 14:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-18 14:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-18 17:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-18 16:37 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-19 1:43 ` Dave Chinner
2024-09-19 3:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-19 3:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-19 3:38 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-19 4:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-19 4:42 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-19 4:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-19 4:46 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-19 5:20 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-19 4:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-20 13:54 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-24 15:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-24 17:16 ` Sam James
2024-09-25 16:06 ` Kairui Song
2024-09-25 16:42 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-27 14:51 ` Sam James
2024-09-27 14:58 ` Jens Axboe
2024-10-01 21:10 ` Kairui Song
2024-09-24 19:17 ` Chris Mason
2024-09-24 19:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-19 6:34 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-19 6:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-19 10:19 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-30 17:34 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-30 18:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-30 19:25 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-30 20:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-09-30 20:56 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-30 22:42 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2024-09-30 23:00 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2024-09-30 23:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-10-01 0:56 ` Chris Mason
2024-10-01 7:54 ` Christian Theune
2024-10-10 6:29 ` Christian Theune
2024-10-11 7:27 ` Christian Theune
2024-10-11 9:08 ` Christian Theune
2024-10-11 13:06 ` Chris Mason
2024-10-11 13:50 ` Christian Theune
2024-10-12 17:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-12-02 10:44 ` Christian Theune
2024-10-01 2:22 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2024-09-16 7:14 ` Christian Theune
2024-09-16 12:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-09-18 8:31 ` Christian Theune
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=ZvtdA2A8Ub9v5v3a@dread.disaster.area \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=ct@flyingcircus.io \
--cc=dqminh@cloudflare.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=regressions@leemhuis.info \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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