Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-25 Thread Chao Yu 

On 2024/3/25 14:56, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:

On Mar 25, 2024 / 11:06, Chao Yu wrote:

On 2024/3/25 10:14, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:

On Mar 24, 2024 / 20:13, Chao Yu wrote:
...

Hi Shinichiro,

Can you please check below diff? IIUC, for the case: f2fs_map_blocks()
returns zero blkaddr in non-primary device, which is a verified valid
block address, we'd better to check m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED instead
of map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR to decide whether tagging IOMAP_MAPPED flag
or not.

---
   fs/f2fs/data.c | 2 +-
   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 6f66e3e4221a..41a56d4298c8 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -4203,7 +4203,7 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;

-   if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
+   if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;



Thanks Chao, I confirmed that the diff above avoids the WARN and zbd/010
failure. From that point of view, it looks good.


Thank you for the confirmation. :)



One thing I noticed is that the commit message of 8d3c1fa3fa5ea ("f2fs:
don't rely on F2FS_MAP_* in f2fs_iomap_begin") says that f2fs_map_blocks()
might be setting F2FS_MAP_* flag on a hole, and that's why the commit
avoided the F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag check. So I was not sure if it is the
right thing to reintroduce the flag check.


I didn't see such logic in previous f2fs_map_blocks(, F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO) 
codebase,
I doubt it hits the same case: map.m_pblk is valid zero blkaddr which locates in
the head of secondary device? What do you think?

Quoted commit message from 8d3c1fa3fa5ea:

When testing with a mixed zoned / convention device combination, there
are regular but not 100% reproducible failures in xfstests generic/113
where the __is_valid_data_blkaddr assert hits due to finding a hole.

Previous code:

-   if (map.m_flags & (F2FS_MAP_MAPPED | F2FS_MAP_UNWRITTEN)) {
-   iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
-   if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
-   iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
-   iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
-   } else {
-   iomap->type = IOMAP_UNWRITTEN;
-   }
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!__is_valid_data_blkaddr(map.m_pblk)))
-   return -EINVAL;


Hmm, I can agree with your guess. Let me add two more points:

1) The commit message says that the generic/113 failure was not 100% recreated.
So it was difficult to confirm that the commit avoided the failure, 
probably.

2) I ran zbd/010 using the kernel just before the commit 8d3c1fa3fa5ea, and
observed the WARN in the hunk you quoted above.

  WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1035 at fs/f2fs/data.c:4164 
f2fs_iomap_begin+0x19e/0x1b0 [f2fs]

So, it implies that the WARN observed xfstests generic/113 has same failure
scenario as blktests zbd/010, probably.


Yup,




Based on these guesses, I think your fix diff is reasonable. If you post it as a
formal patch, feel free to add my:

Tested-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki 


Thank you for the test!

I've submitted a formal patch, let me know, if you have any comments on it, or 
want
to update it.

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-f2fs-devel/20240325152623.797099-1-c...@kernel.org/

Thanks,


___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-25 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
On Mar 25, 2024 / 11:06, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2024/3/25 10:14, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> > On Mar 24, 2024 / 20:13, Chao Yu wrote:
> > ...
> > > Hi Shinichiro,
> > > 
> > > Can you please check below diff? IIUC, for the case: f2fs_map_blocks()
> > > returns zero blkaddr in non-primary device, which is a verified valid
> > > block address, we'd better to check m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED instead
> > > of map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR to decide whether tagging IOMAP_MAPPED flag
> > > or not.
> > > 
> > > ---
> > >   fs/f2fs/data.c | 2 +-
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > index 6f66e3e4221a..41a56d4298c8 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > @@ -4203,7 +4203,7 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, 
> > > loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> > >   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
> > >   return -EINVAL;
> > > 
> > > - if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
> > > + if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
> > >   iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
> > >   iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
> > >   iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
> > > 
> > 
> > Thanks Chao, I confirmed that the diff above avoids the WARN and zbd/010
> > failure. From that point of view, it looks good.
> 
> Thank you for the confirmation. :)
> 
> > 
> > One thing I noticed is that the commit message of 8d3c1fa3fa5ea ("f2fs:
> > don't rely on F2FS_MAP_* in f2fs_iomap_begin") says that f2fs_map_blocks()
> > might be setting F2FS_MAP_* flag on a hole, and that's why the commit
> > avoided the F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag check. So I was not sure if it is the
> > right thing to reintroduce the flag check.
> 
> I didn't see such logic in previous f2fs_map_blocks(, F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO) 
> codebase,
> I doubt it hits the same case: map.m_pblk is valid zero blkaddr which locates 
> in
> the head of secondary device? What do you think?
> 
> Quoted commit message from 8d3c1fa3fa5ea:
> 
> When testing with a mixed zoned / convention device combination, there
> are regular but not 100% reproducible failures in xfstests generic/113
> where the __is_valid_data_blkaddr assert hits due to finding a hole.
> 
> Previous code:
> 
> - if (map.m_flags & (F2FS_MAP_MAPPED | F2FS_MAP_UNWRITTEN)) {
> - iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
> - if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
> - iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
> - iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
> - } else {
> - iomap->type = IOMAP_UNWRITTEN;
> - }
> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!__is_valid_data_blkaddr(map.m_pblk)))
> - return -EINVAL;

Hmm, I can agree with your guess. Let me add two more points:

1) The commit message says that the generic/113 failure was not 100% recreated.
   So it was difficult to confirm that the commit avoided the failure, probably.

2) I ran zbd/010 using the kernel just before the commit 8d3c1fa3fa5ea, and
   observed the WARN in the hunk you quoted above.

 WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1035 at fs/f2fs/data.c:4164 
f2fs_iomap_begin+0x19e/0x1b0 [f2fs]

   So, it implies that the WARN observed xfstests generic/113 has same failure
   scenario as blktests zbd/010, probably.


Based on these guesses, I think your fix diff is reasonable. If you post it as a
formal patch, feel free to add my:

Tested-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki 


___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-24 Thread Chao Yu 

On 2024/3/25 10:14, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:

On Mar 24, 2024 / 20:13, Chao Yu wrote:
...

Hi Shinichiro,

Can you please check below diff? IIUC, for the case: f2fs_map_blocks()
returns zero blkaddr in non-primary device, which is a verified valid
block address, we'd better to check m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED instead
of map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR to decide whether tagging IOMAP_MAPPED flag
or not.

---
  fs/f2fs/data.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 6f66e3e4221a..41a56d4298c8 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -4203,7 +4203,7 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;

-   if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
+   if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;



Thanks Chao, I confirmed that the diff above avoids the WARN and zbd/010
failure. From that point of view, it looks good.


Thank you for the confirmation. :)



One thing I noticed is that the commit message of 8d3c1fa3fa5ea ("f2fs:
don't rely on F2FS_MAP_* in f2fs_iomap_begin") says that f2fs_map_blocks()
might be setting F2FS_MAP_* flag on a hole, and that's why the commit
avoided the F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag check. So I was not sure if it is the
right thing to reintroduce the flag check.


I didn't see such logic in previous f2fs_map_blocks(, F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO) 
codebase,
I doubt it hits the same case: map.m_pblk is valid zero blkaddr which locates in
the head of secondary device? What do you think?

Quoted commit message from 8d3c1fa3fa5ea:

When testing with a mixed zoned / convention device combination, there
are regular but not 100% reproducible failures in xfstests generic/113
where the __is_valid_data_blkaddr assert hits due to finding a hole.

Previous code:

-   if (map.m_flags & (F2FS_MAP_MAPPED | F2FS_MAP_UNWRITTEN)) {
-   iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
-   if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
-   iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
-   iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
-   } else {
-   iomap->type = IOMAP_UNWRITTEN;
-   }
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!__is_valid_data_blkaddr(map.m_pblk)))
-   return -EINVAL;

Thanks,


___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-24 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
On Mar 24, 2024 / 20:13, Chao Yu wrote:
...
> Hi Shinichiro,
> 
> Can you please check below diff? IIUC, for the case: f2fs_map_blocks()
> returns zero blkaddr in non-primary device, which is a verified valid
> block address, we'd better to check m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED instead
> of map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR to decide whether tagging IOMAP_MAPPED flag
> or not.
> 
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/data.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> index 6f66e3e4221a..41a56d4298c8 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> @@ -4203,7 +4203,7 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
> offset, loff_t length,
>   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
>   return -EINVAL;
> 
> - if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
> + if (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) {
>   iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
>   iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
>   iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
> 

Thanks Chao, I confirmed that the diff above avoids the WARN and zbd/010
failure. From that point of view, it looks good.

One thing I noticed is that the commit message of 8d3c1fa3fa5ea ("f2fs:
don't rely on F2FS_MAP_* in f2fs_iomap_begin") says that f2fs_map_blocks()
might be setting F2FS_MAP_* flag on a hole, and that's why the commit
avoided the F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag check. So I was not sure if it is the
right thing to reintroduce the flag check.

___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-24 Thread Chao Yu 

On 2024/3/19 19:13, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:

On Mar 19, 2024 / 10:22, Chao Yu wrote:

On 2024/3/18 13:47, Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:

I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a
look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not
in the commit diff.

I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices,
and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device in the
direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and f2fs_map_blocks_cached()
modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It
becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However,
f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address of the
whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against
NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid
iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length.

This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps.

   - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size each:
 nullb0 and nullb1.
   # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1
   # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}"
   # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192
   # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct

I created a fix candidate patch [1]. It modifies f2fs_iomap_begin() to handle
map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each device start, not the
address of whole f2fs. I confirmed it avoids the WARN.

But I'm not so sure if the fix is good enough. map->m_pblk has dual meanings.
Sometimes it holds the physical block address of each device, and sometimes
the address of the whole f2fs. I'm not sure what is the condition for
map->m_pblk to have which meaning. I guess F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO flag is the
condition, but f2fs_map_blocks_cached() does not ensure it.

Also, I noticed that map->m_pblk is referred to in other functions below, and
not sure if they need the similar change as I did for f2fs_iomap_begin().

f2fs_fiemap()
f2fs_read_single_page()
f2fs_bmap()
check_swap_activate()

I would like to hear advices from f2fs experts for the fix.


[1]

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 26e317696b33..5232223a69e5 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode *inode,
int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = >devs[bidx];
+   map->m_multidev_dio = true;
map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - map->m_pblk);
@@ -4211,9 +4212,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
struct iomap *srcmap)
   {
+   struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
-   int err;
+   block_t pblk;
+   int err, i;
map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);
map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk + 1;
@@ -4239,12 +4242,17 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
 * We should never see delalloc or compressed extents here based on
 * prior flushing and checks.
 */
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == NEW_ADDR))
+   pblk = map.m_pblk;
+   if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED)
+   for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
+   if (FDEV(i).bdev == map.m_bdev)
+   pblk += FDEV(i).start_blk;
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == NEW_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;


Shoudn't we check NEW_ADDR and COMPRESS_ADDR before multiple-device
block address conversion?


As far as I understand, NEW_ADDR and COMPRESS_ADDR in map.m_pblk can be
target of "map->m_pblk -= FDEV(bidx).start_blk;" in f2fs_map_blocks(),
so I guessed that the address conversion should come first.




-   if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
+   if (pblk != NULL_ADDR) {


How to distinguish NULL_ADDR and valid blkaddr 0? I guess it should
check F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag first?


I guessed that physical block address for the whole f2fs (pblk) can not be 0, so
the NULL_ADDR can have zero value. As for the physical block address of each
device (map->m_pblk) can be 0. But this is still my *guess*, and I'm not sure.


The comments from you and Daeho made me rethink. It looks problematic for me
that map->m_pblk has two meanings as I had described: "1) physical block

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-19 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
On Mar 19, 2024 / 10:22, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2024/3/18 13:47, Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
> > I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a
> > look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not
> > in the commit diff.
> > 
> > I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices,
> > and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device 
> > in the
> > direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and 
> > f2fs_map_blocks_cached()
> > modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It
> > becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However,
> > f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address 
> > of the
> > whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against
> > NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid
> > iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length.
> > 
> > This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps.
> > 
> >   - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size 
> > each:
> > nullb0 and nullb1.
> >   # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1
> >   # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}"
> >   # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192
> >   # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct
> > 
> > I created a fix candidate patch [1]. It modifies f2fs_iomap_begin() to 
> > handle
> > map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each device start, not the
> > address of whole f2fs. I confirmed it avoids the WARN.
> > 
> > But I'm not so sure if the fix is good enough. map->m_pblk has dual 
> > meanings.
> > Sometimes it holds the physical block address of each device, and sometimes
> > the address of the whole f2fs. I'm not sure what is the condition for
> > map->m_pblk to have which meaning. I guess F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO flag is the
> > condition, but f2fs_map_blocks_cached() does not ensure it.
> > 
> > Also, I noticed that map->m_pblk is referred to in other functions below, 
> > and
> > not sure if they need the similar change as I did for f2fs_iomap_begin().
> > 
> >f2fs_fiemap()
> >f2fs_read_single_page()
> >f2fs_bmap()
> >check_swap_activate()
> > 
> > I would like to hear advices from f2fs experts for the fix.
> > 
> > 
> > [1]
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > index 26e317696b33..5232223a69e5 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > @@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode 
> > *inode,
> > int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
> > struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = >devs[bidx];
> > +   map->m_multidev_dio = true;
> > map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
> > map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
> > map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - map->m_pblk);
> > @@ -4211,9 +4212,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, 
> > loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> > unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
> > struct iomap *srcmap)
> >   {
> > +   struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
> > struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
> > pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
> > -   int err;
> > +   block_t pblk;
> > +   int err, i;
> > map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);
> > map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk + 1;
> > @@ -4239,12 +4242,17 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, 
> > loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> >  * We should never see delalloc or compressed extents here based on
> >  * prior flushing and checks.
> >  */
> > -   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == NEW_ADDR))
> > +   pblk = map.m_pblk;
> > +   if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED)
> > +   for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
> > +   if (FDEV(i).bdev == map.m_bdev)
> > +   pblk += FDEV(i).start_blk;
> > +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == NEW_ADDR))
> > return -EINVAL;
> > -   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
> > +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
> > return -EINVAL;
> 
> Shoudn't we check NEW_ADDR and COMPRESS_ADDR before multiple-device
> block address conversion?

As far as I understand, NEW_ADDR and COMPRESS_ADDR in map.m_pblk can be
target of "map->m_pblk -= FDEV(bidx).start_blk;" in f2fs_map_blocks(),
so I guessed that the address conversion should come first.

> 
> > -   if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
> > +   if (pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
> 
> How to distinguish NULL_ADDR and valid blkaddr 0? I guess it should
> check F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag first?

I guessed that physical block address for the whole f2fs (pblk) can not be 0, so
the NULL_ADDR can have zero value. As for the physical block address of each
device

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-19 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
On Mar 18, 2024 / 14:12, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 10:49 PM Shinichiro Kawasaki via
> Linux-f2fs-devel  wrote:
> >
> > I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a
> > look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not
> > in the commit diff.
> >
> > I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices,
> > and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device 
> > in the
> > direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and 
> > f2fs_map_blocks_cached()
> > modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It
> > becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However,
> > f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address 
> > of the
> > whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against
> > NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid
> > iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length.
> >
> > This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps.
> >
> >  - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size 
> > each:
> >nullb0 and nullb1.
> >  # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1
> >  # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}"
> >  # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192
> >  # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct
> >
> > I created a fix candidate patch [1]. It modifies f2fs_iomap_begin() to 
> > handle
> > map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each device start, not the
> > address of whole f2fs. I confirmed it avoids the WARN.
> >
> > But I'm not so sure if the fix is good enough. map->m_pblk has dual 
> > meanings.
> > Sometimes it holds the physical block address of each device, and sometimes
> > the address of the whole f2fs. I'm not sure what is the condition for
> > map->m_pblk to have which meaning. I guess F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO flag is the
> > condition, but f2fs_map_blocks_cached() does not ensure it.
> >
> > Also, I noticed that map->m_pblk is referred to in other functions below, 
> > and
> > not sure if they need the similar change as I did for f2fs_iomap_begin().
> >
> >   f2fs_fiemap()
> >   f2fs_read_single_page()
> >   f2fs_bmap()
> >   check_swap_activate()
> >
> > I would like to hear advices from f2fs experts for the fix.
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > index 26e317696b33..5232223a69e5 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > @@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode 
> > *inode,
> > int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
> > struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = >devs[bidx];
> >
> > +   map->m_multidev_dio = true;
> > map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
> > map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
> > map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - 
> > map->m_pblk);
> > @@ -4211,9 +4212,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, 
> > loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> > unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
> > struct iomap *srcmap)
> >  {
> > +   struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
> > struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
> > pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
> > -   int err;
> > +   block_t pblk;
> > +   int err, i;
> >
> > map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);
> > map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk 
> > + 1;
> > @@ -4239,12 +4242,17 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, 
> > loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> >  * We should never see delalloc or compressed extents here based on
> >  * prior flushing and checks.
> >  */
> > -   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == NEW_ADDR))
> > +   pblk = map.m_pblk;
> > +   if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED)
> > +   for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
> > +   if (FDEV(i).bdev == map.m_bdev)
> > +   pblk += FDEV(i).start_blk;
> > +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == NEW_ADDR))
> > return -EINVAL;
> > -   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
> > +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > -   if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
> > +   if (pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
> 
> I feel like we should check only whether the block is really mapped or
> not by checking F2FS_MAP_MAPPED field without changing the pblk, since
> "0" pblk for the secondary device should remain 0 if it's the correct
> value.

My intent was to keep the physical block address from the secondary device
start in map.m_pblk. So "0" for the secondeary device is kept in map.m_pblk.

Having said that, I'm not sure that this modification

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-18 Thread Chao Yu 

On 2024/3/18 13:47, Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:

I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a
look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not
in the commit diff.

I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices,
and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device in the
direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and f2fs_map_blocks_cached()
modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It
becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However,
f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address of the
whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against
NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid
iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length.

This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps.

  - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size each:
nullb0 and nullb1.
  # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1
  # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}"
  # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192
  # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct

I created a fix candidate patch [1]. It modifies f2fs_iomap_begin() to handle
map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each device start, not the
address of whole f2fs. I confirmed it avoids the WARN.

But I'm not so sure if the fix is good enough. map->m_pblk has dual meanings.
Sometimes it holds the physical block address of each device, and sometimes
the address of the whole f2fs. I'm not sure what is the condition for
map->m_pblk to have which meaning. I guess F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO flag is the
condition, but f2fs_map_blocks_cached() does not ensure it.

Also, I noticed that map->m_pblk is referred to in other functions below, and
not sure if they need the similar change as I did for f2fs_iomap_begin().

   f2fs_fiemap()
   f2fs_read_single_page()
   f2fs_bmap()
   check_swap_activate()

I would like to hear advices from f2fs experts for the fix.


[1]

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 26e317696b33..5232223a69e5 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode *inode,
int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = >devs[bidx];
  
+		map->m_multidev_dio = true;

map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - map->m_pblk);
@@ -4211,9 +4212,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
struct iomap *srcmap)
  {
+   struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
-   int err;
+   block_t pblk;
+   int err, i;
  
  	map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);

map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk + 1;
@@ -4239,12 +4242,17 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
 * We should never see delalloc or compressed extents here based on
 * prior flushing and checks.
 */
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == NEW_ADDR))
+   pblk = map.m_pblk;
+   if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED)
+   for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
+   if (FDEV(i).bdev == map.m_bdev)
+   pblk += FDEV(i).start_blk;
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == NEW_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;


Shoudn't we check NEW_ADDR and COMPRESS_ADDR before multiple-device
block address conversion?

  
-	if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {

+   if (pblk != NULL_ADDR) {


How to distinguish NULL_ADDR and valid blkaddr 0? I guess it should
check F2FS_MAP_MAPPED flag first?

Thanks,


iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;

___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel



___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-18 Thread Daeho Jeong 
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 10:49 PM Shinichiro Kawasaki via
Linux-f2fs-devel  wrote:
>
> I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a
> look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not
> in the commit diff.
>
> I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices,
> and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device in 
> the
> direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and f2fs_map_blocks_cached()
> modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It
> becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However,
> f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address of 
> the
> whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against
> NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid
> iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length.
>
> This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps.
>
>  - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size each:
>nullb0 and nullb1.
>  # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1
>  # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}"
>  # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192
>  # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct
>
> I created a fix candidate patch [1]. It modifies f2fs_iomap_begin() to handle
> map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each device start, not the
> address of whole f2fs. I confirmed it avoids the WARN.
>
> But I'm not so sure if the fix is good enough. map->m_pblk has dual meanings.
> Sometimes it holds the physical block address of each device, and sometimes
> the address of the whole f2fs. I'm not sure what is the condition for
> map->m_pblk to have which meaning. I guess F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO flag is the
> condition, but f2fs_map_blocks_cached() does not ensure it.
>
> Also, I noticed that map->m_pblk is referred to in other functions below, and
> not sure if they need the similar change as I did for f2fs_iomap_begin().
>
>   f2fs_fiemap()
>   f2fs_read_single_page()
>   f2fs_bmap()
>   check_swap_activate()
>
> I would like to hear advices from f2fs experts for the fix.
>
>
> [1]
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> index 26e317696b33..5232223a69e5 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> @@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode *inode,
> int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
> struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = >devs[bidx];
>
> +   map->m_multidev_dio = true;
> map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
> map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
> map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - map->m_pblk);
> @@ -4211,9 +4212,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, 
> loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
> struct iomap *srcmap)
>  {
> +   struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
> struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
> pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
> -   int err;
> +   block_t pblk;
> +   int err, i;
>
> map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);
> map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk + 
> 1;
> @@ -4239,12 +4242,17 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, 
> loff_t offset, loff_t length,
>  * We should never see delalloc or compressed extents here based on
>  * prior flushing and checks.
>  */
> -   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == NEW_ADDR))
> +   pblk = map.m_pblk;
> +   if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED)
> +   for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
> +   if (FDEV(i).bdev == map.m_bdev)
> +   pblk += FDEV(i).start_blk;
> +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == NEW_ADDR))
> return -EINVAL;
> -   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
> +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> -   if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
> +   if (pblk != NULL_ADDR) {

I feel like we should check only whether the block is really mapped or
not by checking F2FS_MAP_MAPPED field without changing the pblk, since
"0" pblk for the secondary device should remain 0 if it's the correct
value.

> iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
> iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
> iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;
>
> ___
> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel


___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-17 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a
look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not
in the commit diff.

I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices,
and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device in the
direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and f2fs_map_blocks_cached()
modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It
becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However,
f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address of the
whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against
NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid
iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length.

This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps.

 - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size each:
   nullb0 and nullb1.
 # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1
 # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}"
 # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192
 # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct

I created a fix candidate patch [1]. It modifies f2fs_iomap_begin() to handle
map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each device start, not the
address of whole f2fs. I confirmed it avoids the WARN.

But I'm not so sure if the fix is good enough. map->m_pblk has dual meanings.
Sometimes it holds the physical block address of each device, and sometimes
the address of the whole f2fs. I'm not sure what is the condition for
map->m_pblk to have which meaning. I guess F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO flag is the
condition, but f2fs_map_blocks_cached() does not ensure it.

Also, I noticed that map->m_pblk is referred to in other functions below, and
not sure if they need the similar change as I did for f2fs_iomap_begin().

  f2fs_fiemap()
  f2fs_read_single_page()
  f2fs_bmap()
  check_swap_activate()

I would like to hear advices from f2fs experts for the fix.


[1]

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 26e317696b33..5232223a69e5 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -1569,6 +1569,7 @@ static bool f2fs_map_blocks_cached(struct inode *inode,
int bidx = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, map->m_pblk);
struct f2fs_dev_info *dev = >devs[bidx];
 
+   map->m_multidev_dio = true;
map->m_bdev = dev->bdev;
map->m_pblk -= dev->start_blk;
map->m_len = min(map->m_len, dev->end_blk + 1 - map->m_pblk);
@@ -4211,9 +4212,11 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
unsigned int flags, struct iomap *iomap,
struct iomap *srcmap)
 {
+   struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode);
struct f2fs_map_blocks map = {};
pgoff_t next_pgofs = 0;
-   int err;
+   block_t pblk;
+   int err, i;
 
map.m_lblk = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset);
map.m_len = bytes_to_blks(inode, offset + length - 1) - map.m_lblk + 1;
@@ -4239,12 +4242,17 @@ static int f2fs_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t 
offset, loff_t length,
 * We should never see delalloc or compressed extents here based on
 * prior flushing and checks.
 */
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == NEW_ADDR))
+   pblk = map.m_pblk;
+   if (map.m_multidev_dio && map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED)
+   for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
+   if (FDEV(i).bdev == map.m_bdev)
+   pblk += FDEV(i).start_blk;
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == NEW_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(map.m_pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pblk == COMPRESS_ADDR))
return -EINVAL;
 
-   if (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
+   if (pblk != NULL_ADDR) {
iomap->length = blks_to_bytes(inode, map.m_len);
iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
iomap->flags |= IOMAP_F_MERGED;

___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-12 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
On Mar 12, 2024 / 12:57, Yi Zhang wrote:
...
> Sorry, please use this one.

Thanks. I have succeeded to recreate the issue. Will take a look tomorrow.


___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-11 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
On Mar 01, 2024 / 15:49, Yi Zhang wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 8:08 PM Yi Zhang  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 7:09 PM Shinichiro Kawasaki
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Feb 19, 2024 / 00:58, Yi Zhang wrote:
> > > > Hello
> > > > I reproduced this issue on the latest linux-block/for-next, please
> > > > help check it and let me know if you need more info/test, thanks.
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > [ 4381.278858] [ cut here ]
> > > > [ 4381.283484] WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51
> > > > iomap_iter+0x32b/0x350
> > >
> > > I can not recreate the WARN and the failure on my test machines. On the 
> > > other
> > > hand, it is repeatedly recreated on CKI test machines since Feb/19/2024 
> > > [1].
> > >
> > >   [1] https://datawarehouse.cki-project.org/issue/2508
> > >
> > > I assume that a kernel change triggered the failure.
> > >
> > > Yi, is it possible to bisect and identify the trigger commit using CKI 
> > > test
> > > machines? The failure is observed with v6.6.17 and v6.6.18 kernel. I 
> > > guess the
> > > failure was not observed with v6.6.16 kernel, so I suggest to bisect 
> > > between
> 
> Bisect shows it was introduced with the below commit:
> 
> commit dbf8e63f48af48f3f0a069fc971c9826312dbfc1
> Author: Eunhee Rho 
> Date:   Mon Aug 1 13:40:02 2022 +0900
> 
> f2fs: remove device type check for direct IO

Yi, thanks for bisecting. I hope Eunhee has time to check.

> 
> I also attached the config file in case you want to reproduce it.

The attached config file has this line:

# CONFIG_F2FS_FS is not set

But the WARN happened after f2fs mount, so this config should not be able to
recreate the WARN. If you have time to afford, please check and share the config
file again.

___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-03-01 Thread Bart Van Assche 

On 2/29/24 23:49, Yi Zhang wrote:

Bisect shows it was introduced with the below commit:

commit dbf8e63f48af48f3f0a069fc971c9826312dbfc1
Author: Eunhee Rho 
Date:   Mon Aug 1 13:40:02 2022 +0900

 f2fs: remove device type check for direct IO


(+Eunhee)

Thank you Yi for having bisected this issue. I know this takes
considerable effort.

Eunhee, please take a look at this bug report:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHj4cs-kfojYC9i0G73PRkYzcxCTex=-vugrfep40g_urgv...@mail.gmail.com/

Thanks,

Bart.


___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-02-28 Thread Yi Zhang 
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 7:09 PM Shinichiro Kawasaki
 wrote:
>
> On Feb 19, 2024 / 00:58, Yi Zhang wrote:
> > Hello
> > I reproduced this issue on the latest linux-block/for-next, please
> > help check it and let me know if you need more info/test, thanks.
>
> [...]
>
> > [ 4381.278858] [ cut here ]
> > [ 4381.283484] WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51
> > iomap_iter+0x32b/0x350
>
> I can not recreate the WARN and the failure on my test machines. On the other
> hand, it is repeatedly recreated on CKI test machines since Feb/19/2024 [1].
>
>   [1] https://datawarehouse.cki-project.org/issue/2508
>
> I assume that a kernel change triggered the failure.
>
> Yi, is it possible to bisect and identify the trigger commit using CKI test
> machines? The failure is observed with v6.6.17 and v6.6.18 kernel. I guess the
> failure was not observed with v6.6.16 kernel, so I suggest to bisect between

Sure, will try to bisect it later this week. :)

> v6.6.16 and v6.6.17.
>


-- 
Best Regards,
  Yi Zhang



___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Re: [f2fs-dev] [bug report]WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 iomap_iter+0x32b observed with blktests zbd/010

2024-02-28 Thread Shinichiro Kawasaki via Linux-f2fs-devel 
On Feb 19, 2024 / 00:58, Yi Zhang wrote:
> Hello
> I reproduced this issue on the latest linux-block/for-next, please
> help check it and let me know if you need more info/test, thanks.

[...]

> [ 4381.278858] [ cut here ]
> [ 4381.283484] WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51
> iomap_iter+0x32b/0x350

I can not recreate the WARN and the failure on my test machines. On the other
hand, it is repeatedly recreated on CKI test machines since Feb/19/2024 [1].

  [1] https://datawarehouse.cki-project.org/issue/2508

I assume that a kernel change triggered the failure.

Yi, is it possible to bisect and identify the trigger commit using CKI test
machines? The failure is observed with v6.6.17 and v6.6.18 kernel. I guess the
failure was not observed with v6.6.16 kernel, so I suggest to bisect between
v6.6.16 and v6.6.17.

___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel