[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2/dlm: return DLM_CANCELGRANT if the lock is on granted list and the operation is canceled

Changwei Ge ge.changwei at h3c.com
Fri Feb 15 01:27:49 PST 2019


On 2019/2/15 17:20, piaojun wrote:
> Hi Changwei,
> 
> On 2019/2/15 15:56, Changwei Ge wrote:
>> Hi Jun
>>
>> I just read the code around unlock/cancel.
>>
>> On 2019/2/15 15:35, piaojun wrote:
>>> Hi Changwei,
>>>
>>> On 2019/2/15 15:06, Changwei Ge wrote:
>>>> Hi Jun,
>>>>
>>>> On 2019/2/15 14:51, piaojun wrote:
>>>>> Hi Changwei,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2019/2/14 18:13, Changwei Ge wrote:
>>>>>> On 2019/2/14 17:09, piaojun wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Changwei,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The problem can't be solved completely if clear ::cancel_pending in
>>>>>>> dlm_proxy_ast_handler, as AST will come at anytime just before
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So how about also add check here bere setting ::cancel_pending in dlmunlock_common() before invoking dlm_send_remote_unlock_request().
>>>>>> If already on grant list just return DLM_CANCELGRANT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then a further reference code might look like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> root at ubuntu16:/home/chge/linux[master]# git diff
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmast.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmast.c
>>>>>> index 39831fc..812843b 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmast.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmast.c
>>>>>> @@ -372,8 +372,11 @@ int dlm_proxy_ast_handler(struct o2net_msg *msg, u32 len, void *data,
>>>>>>             head = &res->converting;
>>>>>>             lock = NULL;
>>>>>>             list_for_each_entry(lock, head, list) {
>>>>>> -               if (lock->ml.cookie == cookie)
>>>>>> +               if (lock->ml.cookie == cookie) {
>>>>>> +                       if (lock->cancel_pending)
>>>>>> +                               lock->cancel_pending = 0;
>>>>>>                             goto do_ast;
>>>>>> +               }
>>>>>>             }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             /* if not on convert, try blocked for ast, granted for bast */
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
>>>>>> index c8e9b70..b4728b5 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
>>>>>> @@ -174,9 +174,14 @@ static enum dlm_status dlmunlock_common(struct dlm_ctxt *dlm,
>>>>>>             if (!master_node) {
>>>>>>                     owner = res->owner;
>>>>>>                     /* drop locks and send message */
>>>>>> -               if (flags & LKM_CANCEL)
>>>>>> +               if (flags & LKM_CANCEL) {
>>>>>> +                       if (dlm_lock_on_list(&res->granted, lock)) {
>>>>>> +                               status = DLM_CANCELGRANT;
>>>>>> +                               goto leave;
>>
>> I found that above code should be useless.
>> As upstream code already take it into consideration that AST has come before cancellation.
>> In dlm_get_cancel_actions()
>> 	'''
>> 	} else if (dlm_lock_on_list(&res->granted, lock)) {
>> 		/* too late, already granted. */
>> 		status = DLM_CANCELGRANT;
>> 		*actions = DLM_UNLOCK_CALL_AST;
>> 	} else {
>> 	'''
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If master dead and then lockres is moved to granted list in
>>>>> dlm_move_lockres_to_recovery_list, the OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY is not cleared.
>>>>
>>>> OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY  should be cleared in ocfs2_locking_ast() since previous locking AST has come back(moving lock to grant list).
>>>> That's why we return DLM_CANCELGRANT to caller to avoid calling AST. Otherwise ast() will be called twice, which is obviously a BUG.
>>>
>>> I mean master is already dead and ast won't come. So the
>>> OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY is not cleared. And there are two cases that lockres is
>>> moved to grant list:
>>> 1. AST comes back and OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY is cleared.
>>> 2. AST does not come back and OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY remains, recovery process
>>>      move it to grant list. In this case, we need do AST for it.
>>
>> For point 2, ocfs2 can handle it, so you still don't have to worry. It's no problem.
>> In dlmconvert_remote()
> 
> What I worry about is that OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY won't be cleared if remote
> master is dead, as OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY is cleared in two cases:
> 1. remote AST come, clear it in dlm_proxy_ast_handler.
> 2. remote AST does not come when master dead, clear it in
>     o2dlm_unlock_ast_wrapper.

Please don't worry about point 2.
Like my previous e-mail, after dlm recovery picking up a new master for corresponding lock resource.
dlmlock() -> convert will retry and send request to new master.
Eventually, this locking(convert) will succeed and ast() will be called for ocfs2 layer to clear OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY.

Thanks,
Changwei

> 
> For case 2, if DLM_CANCELGRANT is set, o2dlm_unlock_ast_wrapper just
> return and won't clear OCFS2_LOCK_BUSY. So in this case, I think we
> should do AST again for it.
> 
>>
>>
>> 341         if (status != DLM_NORMAL) {
>> 342                 if (status != DLM_NOTQUEUED)
>> 343                         dlm_error(status);
>> 344                 dlm_revert_pending_convert(res, lock);
>> 345         } else if (!lock->convert_pending) {
>> 346                 mlog(0, "%s: res %.*s, owner died and lock has been moved back "
>> 347                                 "to granted list, retry convert.\n",
>> 348                                 dlm->name, res->lockname.len, res->lockname.name);
>> 349                 status = DLM_RECOVERING;
>> 350         }
>>
>> Thus, dlmlock() will wait until RECOVERY is done.
>> And for ocfs2 layer, it's apparent, it doesn't have to be aware of what happened to DLM.
> 
> I do not think the waiting can solve this problem.
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Changwei
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps we need do AST again for it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> And this will cause stuck problem when ocfs2_drop_lock. The reason is
>>>>> that unlock ast won't be done when DLM_CANCELGRANT is set. So I think
>>>>
>>>> With above elaboration, you don't have to worry the hang issue anymore.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Changwei
>>>>
>>>>> we need distinguish all the cases of moving lockres to grant list.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +                       }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>                             lock->cancel_pending = 1;
>>>>>> -               else
>>>>>> +               } else
>>>>>>                             lock->unlock_pending = 1;
>>>>>>                     spin_unlock(&lock->spinlock);
>>>>>>                     spin_unlock(&res->spinlock);
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Changwei
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ::cancel_pendig is set. If there is not any other better solutions,
>>>>>>> could we accept this patch? This bug is very harmful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Jun
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2018/12/8 18:05, wangjian wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Changwei,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I understand your idea. But we should be aware that the cancel_convert process and
>>>>>>>> other processes (accepting the AST process, the recovery process) are asynchronous.
>>>>>>>> For example, according to your idea, check if the lock is in the grant queue before
>>>>>>>> calling the dlm_send_remote_unlock_request function in the dlm_proxy_ast_handler function.
>>>>>>>> Then decide whether to clear cancel_pending. But if the AST does not come at this time,
>>>>>>>> the check passes and cancel_pendig will not be cleared. Then AST immediately came over again,
>>>>>>>> which also led to a bug. I personally think that for asynchronous processes we can't guarantee
>>>>>>>> the speed of execution of each process. All we can do is to avoid the BUG scene.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As for the question you said ("If you remove the BUG check why you still call dlm_commit_pending_cancel()
>>>>>>>> to move the lock back to grant on matter it's on converting list or not?").
>>>>>>>> I think we should first check if the lock is in the grant queue
>>>>>>>> (at this time, dlm->spinlock and res->spinlock have been added), then decide whether to call
>>>>>>>> dlm_commit_pending_cancel function.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Jian
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/7/2018 11:12 AM, Changwei Ge wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Jian,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suppose that the situation you described truly exists.
>>>>>>>>> But the way you fix the issue is not in my favor.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you remove the BUG check why you still call dlm_commit_pending_cancel() to
>>>>>>>>> move the lock back to grant on matter it's on converting list or not?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So how about keeping the BUG check in dlm_move_lockres_to_recovery_list().
>>>>>>>>> If the locking _ast_ comes back very fast just check ::cancel_pending in dlm_proxy_ast_handler() and clear it.
>>>>>>>>> Then with the logic checking if the lock is on grant list (in dlmunlock_common() more less like your current method)
>>>>>>>>> or not we can easily tell if the cancellation succeeds or not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That complies the original dlm design, which I think is better and easier for maintainers to understand.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Changwei
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2018/12/6 20:06, wangjian wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Changwei,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't fully agree with your point of view. In my opinion, the lock cancellation process and the lock
>>>>>>>>>> conversion process are asynchronous. We can't guarantee that the lock must be in the convert list
>>>>>>>>>> during the lock conversion process, otherwise this BUG will not happen.
>>>>>>>>>> So, I think this is a meaningless BUG.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Jian
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/2018 9:49 AM, Changwei Ge wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jian,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose you can't just remove the BUG_ON() check.
>>>>>>>>>>> If you remove it, below code violates the original logic.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> '''
>>>>>>>>>>> 2141                                 dlm_commit_pending_cancel(res, lock);
>>>>>>>>>>> '''
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What's more important is *locking cancel* must be against a *locking conversion* progress.
>>>>>>>>>>> So it makes sense to check if this lock is on converting list.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So I have to NACK to this patch.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Changwei
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2018/12/3 20:23, wangjian wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In the dlm_move_lockres_to_recovery_list function, if the lock
>>>>>>>>>>>> is in the granted queue and cancel_pending is set, it will
>>>>>>>>>>>> encounter a BUG. I think this is a meaningless BUG,
>>>>>>>>>>>> so be prepared to remove it. A scenario that causes
>>>>>>>>>>>> this BUG will be given below.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> At the beginning, Node 1 is the master and has NL lock,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 2 has PR lock, Node 3 has PR lock too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 1          Node 2          Node 3
>>>>>>>>>>>>                   want to get EX lock.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   want to get EX lock.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 3 hinder
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 2 to get
>>>>>>>>>>>> EX lock, send
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 3 a BAST.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   receive BAST from
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   Node 1. downconvert
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   thread begin to
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   cancel PR to EX conversion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   In dlmunlock_common function,
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   downconvert thread has set
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   lock->cancel_pending,
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   but did not enter
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   dlm_send_remote_unlock_request
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   function.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                   Node2 dies because
>>>>>>>>>>>>                   the host is powered down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In recovery process,
>>>>>>>>>>>> clean the lock that
>>>>>>>>>>>> related to Node2.
>>>>>>>>>>>> then finish Node 3
>>>>>>>>>>>> PR to EX request.
>>>>>>>>>>>> give Node 3 a AST.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   receive AST from Node 1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   change lock level to EX,
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   move lock to granted list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node1 dies because
>>>>>>>>>>>> the host is powered down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   In dlm_move_lockres_to_recovery_list
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   function. the lock is in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   granted queue and cancel_pending
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   is set. BUG_ON.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But after clearing this BUG, process will encounter
>>>>>>>>>>>> the second BUG in the ocfs2_unlock_ast function.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is a scenario that will cause the second BUG
>>>>>>>>>>>> in ocfs2_unlock_ast as follows:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> At the beginning, Node 1 is the master and has NL lock,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 2 has PR lock, Node 3 has PR lock too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 1          Node 2          Node 3
>>>>>>>>>>>>                   want to get EX lock.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   want to get EX lock.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 3 hinder
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 2 to get
>>>>>>>>>>>> EX lock, send
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node 3 a BAST.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   receive BAST from
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   Node 1. downconvert
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   thread begin to
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   cancel PR to EX conversion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   In dlmunlock_common function,
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   downconvert thread has released
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   lock->spinlock and res->spinlock,
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   but did not enter
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   dlm_send_remote_unlock_request
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   function.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                   Node2 dies because
>>>>>>>>>>>>                   the host is powered down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In recovery process,
>>>>>>>>>>>> clean the lock that
>>>>>>>>>>>> related to Node2.
>>>>>>>>>>>> then finish Node 3
>>>>>>>>>>>> PR to EX request.
>>>>>>>>>>>> give Node 3 a AST.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   receive AST from Node 1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   change lock level to EX,
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   move lock to granted list,
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   set lockres->l_unlock_action
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   as OCFS2_UNLOCK_INVALID
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   in ocfs2_locking_ast function.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Node2 dies because
>>>>>>>>>>>> the host is powered down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   Node 3 realize that Node 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   is dead, remove Node 1 from
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   domain_map. downconvert thread
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   get DLM_NORMAL from
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   dlm_send_remote_unlock_request
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   function and set *call_ast as 1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   Then downconvert thread meet
>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   BUG in ocfs2_unlock_ast function.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To avoid meet the second BUG, function dlmunlock_common shuold
>>>>>>>>>>>> return DLM_CANCELGRANT if the lock is on granted list and
>>>>>>>>>>>> the operation is canceled.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jian Wang<wangjian161 at huawei.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Yiwen Jiang<jiangyiwen at huawei.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>>>        fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c | 1 -
>>>>>>>>>>>>        fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c   | 5 +++++
>>>>>>>>>>>>        2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c
>>>>>>>>>>>> index 802636d..7489652 100644
>>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c
>>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c
>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -2134,7 +2134,6 @@ void dlm_move_lockres_to_recovery_list(struct dlm_ctxt *dlm,
>>>>>>>>>>>>        				 * if this had completed successfully
>>>>>>>>>>>>        				 * before sending this lock state to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>        				 * new master */
>>>>>>>>>>>> -				BUG_ON(i != DLM_CONVERTING_LIST);
>>>>>>>>>>>>        				mlog(0, "node died with cancel pending "
>>>>>>>>>>>>        				     "on %.*s. move back to granted list.\n",
>>>>>>>>>>>>        				     res->lockname.len, res->lockname.name);
>>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
>>>>>>>>>>>> index 63d701c..505bb6c 100644
>>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
>>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmunlock.c
>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -183,6 +183,11 @@ static enum dlm_status dlmunlock_common(struct dlm_ctxt *dlm,
>>>>>>>>>>>>        							flags, owner);
>>>>>>>>>>>>        		spin_lock(&res->spinlock);
>>>>>>>>>>>>        		spin_lock(&lock->spinlock);
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> +		if ((flags & LKM_CANCEL) &&
>>>>>>>>>>>> +				dlm_lock_on_list(&res->granted, lock))
>>>>>>>>>>>> +			status = DLM_CANCELGRANT;
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>>        		/* if the master told us the lock was already granted,
>>>>>>>>>>>>        		 * let the ast handle all of these actions */
>>>>>>>>>>>>        		if (status == DLM_CANCELGRANT) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.3.1
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com
>>>>>>>> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>
>> .
>>
> 



More information about the Ocfs2-devel mailing list