Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1616425
| From | NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it |
| Date | 2017-04-05 00:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsF7A-2v6-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <tseh3-1yt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tsfGa-2BB-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <tsgCe-3bM-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <tsn10-7wd-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tsvhU-4mH-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
On Tue, Apr 04 2017, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 01:03:22PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 03 2017, Jeff Layton wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 2017-04-03 at 12:16 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >> >> So, OK, that makes sense, we should keep allowing filesystems to report >> >> ENOSPC as a writeback error. But I think much of the argument below >> >> still holds, and we should continue to have a prior EIO to be reported >> >> over a new ENOSPC (even if the program has already consumed the EIO). >> > >> > I'm fine with that (though I'd like Neil's thoughts before we decide >> > anything) there. >> >> I'd like there be a well defined time when old errors were forgotten. >> It does make sense for EIO to persist even if ENOSPC or EDQUOT is >> received, but not forever. >> Clearing the remembered errors when put_write_access() causes >> i_writecount to reach zero is one option (as suggested), but I'm not >> sure I'm happy with it. >> >> Local filesystems, or network filesystems which receive strong write >> delegations, should only ever return EIO to fsync. We should >> concentrate on them first, I think. As there is only one possible >> error, the seq counter is sufficient to "clear" it once it has been >> reported to fsync() (or write()?). >> >> Other network filesystems could return a whole host of errors: ENOSPC >> EDQUOT ESTALE EPERM EFBIG ... >> Do we want to limit exactly which errors are allowed in generic code, or >> do we just support EIO generically and expect the filesystem to sort out >> the details for anything else? > > I'd like us to focus on our POSIX compliance here and not return > arbitrary errors. The relevant pages are here: > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/fsync.html > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/write.html > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/close.html > > For close(), we have to map every error to EIO. > For fsync(), we can return any error that write() could have. That limits > us to: > > EFBIG ENOSPC EIO ENOBUFS ENXIO > > I think EFBIG really isn't a writeback error; are there any network > filesystems that don't know the file size limit at the time they accept > the original write? ENOBUFS seems like a transient error (*this* call to > fsync() failed, but the next one may succeed ... it's the equivalent of > ENOMEM). ENXIO seems to me like it's a submission error, not a writeback > error. So that leaves us with ENOSPC and EIO, as we have support today. I guess Posix doesn't acknowledge the existence of disk quotas? I think we need to add EDQUOT to your list. Other hypothetical errors errors from the server such as EPERM or ESTALE can reasonably be mapped to EIO. > >> One possible approach a filesystem could take is just to allow a single >> async writeback error. After that error, all subsequent write() >> system calls become synchronous. As write() or fsync() is called on each >> file descriptor (which could possibly have sent the write which caused >> the error), an error is returned and that fact is counted. Once we have >> returned as many errors as there are open file descriptors >> (i_writecount?), and have seen a successful write, the filesystem >> forgets all recorded errors and switches back to async writes (for that >> inode). NFS does this switch-to-sync-on-error. See nfs_need_check_write(). >> >> The "which could possibly have sent the write which caused the error" is >> an explicit reference to NFS. NFS doesn't use the AS_EIO/AS_ENOSPC >> flags to return async errors. It allocates an nfs_open_context for each >> user who opens a given inode, and stores an error in there. Each dirty >> pages is associated with one of these, so errors a sure to go to the >> correct user, though not necessarily the correct fd at present. > > ... and you need the nfs_open_context in order to use the correct > credentials when writing a page to the server, correct? Correct. Thanks, NeilBrown > >> When we specify the new behaviour we should be careful to be as vague as >> possible while still saying what we need. This allows filesystems some >> flexibility. >> >> If an error happens during writeback, the next write() or fsync() (or >> ....) on the file descriptor to which data was written will return -1 >> with errno set to EIO or some other relevant error. Other file >> descriptors open on the same file may receive EIO or some other error >> on a subsequent appropriate system call. >> It should not be assumed that close() will return an error. fsync() >> must be called before close() if writeback errors are important to the >> application. > > Thanks for explaining what NFS does today.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-03-31 21:30 +0200
[RFC PATCH 2/4] dax: set errors in mapping when writeback fails Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-03-31 21:30 +0200
[RFC PATCH 1/4] fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-03-31 21:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com> - 2017-04-03 09:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 12:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-03 16:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 17:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-03 18:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 18:40 +0200
[RFC PATCH 4/4] ext4: wire it up to the new writeback error reporting infrastructure Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-03-31 21:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-03 06:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 12:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-03 16:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 19:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org> - 2017-04-03 20:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 20:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org> - 2017-04-03 20:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org> - 2017-04-03 20:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 20:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-03 21:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-03 22:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-04 04:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-04 05:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-04 13:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-05 00:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-04 14:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-04 14:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-04 18:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-04 18:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-04 19:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-04 20:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-05 01:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-05 22:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-05 23:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-06 02:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-06 02:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-06 05:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-06 07:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-06 15:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-07 00:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 16:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 21:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-06 22:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-07 15:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-10 01:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-10 15:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-07 00:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-05 01:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-04-05 13:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-06 02:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> - 2017-04-04 15:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-04-05 00:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] fs: introduce new writeback error tracking infrastructure and convert ext4 to use it Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-04-03 17:00 +0200
csiph-web