On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 02:53:49PM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote: > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 07:06:20PM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote: > > ... > > > What concerns me is that even if the attempted unmount gets EBUSY, the > > > user-level process descending the directory hierarchy is getting ENOENT > > > trying to issue fstatfs() against an open file descriptor. > > > > > > I'm having trouble figuring out any way that makes any sense. > > > > Basically, the problem is that NFS uses shared lookup, and this allows > > for the bug where several negative namecache entries are created for > > non-existent node. Then this node gets created, removing only the first > > negative namecache entry. For some reasons, vnode is reclaimed; amd' > > tasting of unmount is a good reason for vnode to be reclaimed. > > > > Now, you have existing path and a negative cache entry. This was > > reported by Peter Holm first, I listed relevant revisions that > > should fix this in previous mail. > > Well, I messed up the machine I had been using for testing, and needed > to wait for IT to do something to it since I don't have physical or > console access to it. > > So after I happened to demonstrate the effect using my desktop -- which > had been running RELENG_7_1, sources updated as of around 0400 hrs. > US/Pacific -- I decided to go ahead and update the desktop to RELENG_7_1 > as of this morning (which had the commit to sys/kern/vfs_cache.c), then > test. > > It still failed, apparently in the same way; details below. > > First, here's a list of the files that were changed: > > U lib/libarchive/archive_read_support_format_iso9660.c > U lib/libarchive/archive_string.c > U lib/libarchive/archive_string.h > U lib/libc/gen/times.3 > U lib/libc/i386/sys/pipe.S > U lib/libc/i386/sys/reboot.S > U lib/libc/i386/sys/setlogin.S > U lib/libutil/Makefile > U lib/libutil/kinfo_getfile.c > U lib/libutil/kinfo_getvmmap.c > U lib/libutil/libutil.h > U share/man/man4/bce.4 > U share/man/man5/Makefile > U share/man/man5/fstab.5 > U share/man/man5/nullfs.5 > U sys/amd64/Makefile > U sys/boot/forth/loader.conf.5 > U sys/dev/ale/if_ale.c > U sys/dev/bce/if_bce.c > U sys/dev/cxgb/cxgb_main.c > U sys/dev/cxgb/common/cxgb_ael1002.c > U sys/dev/cxgb/common/cxgb_t3_hw.c > U sys/dev/cxgb/common/cxgb_xgmac.c > U sys/dev/re/if_re.c > U sys/fs/nullfs/null_vnops.c > U sys/kern/Make.tags.inc > U sys/kern/kern_descrip.c > U sys/kern/kern_proc.c > U sys/kern/vfs_cache.c > U sys/netinet/in_pcb.h > U sys/pci/if_rlreg.h > U sys/sys/sysctl.h > U sys/sys/user.h > U sys/ufs/ufs/ufs_quota.c > U usr.bin/procstat/Makefile > U usr.bin/procstat/procstat_files.c > U usr.bin/procstat/procstat_vm.c > U usr.bin/tar/util.c > U usr.bin/tar/test/Makefile > U usr.bin/tar/test/test_strip_components.c > U usr.bin/tar/test/test_symlink_dir.c > U usr.bin/xargs/xargs.1 > U usr.sbin/mtree/mtree.c > > We see that sys/kern/vfs_cache.c is, indeed, among them. And: > > dwolf-bsd(7.1-P)[5] grep '\$FreeBSD' /sys/kern/vfs_cache.c > __FBSDID("$FreeBSD: src/sys/kern/vfs_cache.c,v 1.114.2.3 2008/12/09 16:20:58 kib Exp $"); > dwolf-bsd(7.1-P)[6] > > That should correspond to the desired version of the file. > > Here we see an excerpt from the ktrace output for the amd(8) process and > its children; this is a point when amd(8) is trying an unmount() to see > if it can get away with it: > > 977 amd 1229033597.269612 CALL gettimeofday(0x807ad48,0) > 977 amd 1229033597.269620 RET gettimeofday 0 > 977 amd 1229033597.269630 CALL sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,0xbfbfeaec,0xbfbfeadc) > 977 amd 1229033597.269637 RET sigprocmask 0 > 977 amd 1229033597.269645 CALL fork > 977 amd 1229033597.273810 RET fork 1712/0x6b0 > 1712 amd 1229033597.273811 RET fork 0 > 977 amd 1229033597.273836 CALL sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK,0xbfbfeadc,0) > 1712 amd 1229033597.273845 CALL getpid > 977 amd 1229033597.273850 RET sigprocmask 0 > 1712 amd 1229033597.273855 RET getpid 1712/0x6b0 > 977 amd 1229033597.273864 CALL gettimeofday(0x807ad48,0) > 977 amd 1229033597.273874 RET gettimeofday 0 > 1712 amd 1229033597.273878 CALL unmount(0x2832c610,<invalid>0) > ... > 1712 amd 1229033597.352643 RET unmount -1 errno 16 Device busy > 1712 amd 1229033597.352695 CALL sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,0x28097c00,0xbfbfea0c) > 1712 amd 1229033597.352728 RET sigprocmask 0 > 1712 amd 1229033597.352751 CALL sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK,0x28097c10,0) > 1712 amd 1229033597.352769 RET sigprocmask 0 > 1712 amd 1229033597.352781 CALL sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK,0x28097c00,0xbfbfe9dc) > 1712 amd 1229033597.352790 RET sigprocmask 0 > 1712 amd 1229033597.352801 CALL sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK,0x28097c10,0) > 1712 amd 1229033597.352805 RET sigprocmask 0 > 1712 amd 1229033597.352815 CALL exit(0x10) > 977 amd 1229033597.353085 RET select -1 errno 4 Interrupted system call > 977 amd 1229033597.353093 PSIG SIGCHLD caught handler=0x805de50 mask=0x0 code=0x0 > 977 amd 1229033597.353103 CALL wait4(0xffffffff,0xbfbfe83c,WNOHANG,0) > 977 amd 1229033597.353116 RET wait4 1712/0x6b0 > 977 amd 1229033597.353122 CALL wait4(0xffffffff,0xbfbfe83c,WNOHANG,0) > 977 amd 1229033597.353127 RET wait4 -1 errno 10 No child processes > > > So amd(8) master process (pid 977) jorks off a child (pid 1712) to > try an umount(), which it initiates at 1229033597.273878. At > 1229033597.352643 the child gets control back, as well as an EBUSY, > which I would expect to mean that the attempt failed. The child > exits at 1229033597.352815 with a status code of 16. > > Armed with that, we look at a ktrace excerpt from "rm -fr": > > 1660 rm 1229033597.283277 CALL rmdir(0x2822b388) > 1660 rm 1229033597.283283 NAMI "stvef-paks" > 1660 rm 1229033597.285599 RET rmdir 0 > 1660 rm 1229033597.285620 CALL stat(0x2822b3e8,0xbfbfe8dc) > 1660 rm 1229033597.285626 NAMI "stvef-server" > 1660 rm 1229033597.286071 STRU struct stat {dev=83951372, ino=20124614, mode=drwxr-xr-x , nlink=3, uid=9874, gid=929, rdev=0, atime=1228844788, stime=1227555769, ctime=1228845828.326650000, birthtime=0, size=4096, blksize=4096, blocks=8, flags=0x0 } > 1660 rm 1229033597.286078 RET stat 0 > 1660 rm 1229033597.286084 CALL open(0x2822b3e8,O_NONBLOCK,<unused>0x1) > 1660 rm 1229033597.286091 NAMI "stvef-server" > 1660 rm 1229033597.287145 RET open 4 > 1660 rm 1229033597.287154 CALL fstat(0x4,0xbfbfe8dc) > 1660 rm 1229033597.287161 STRU struct stat {dev=83951372, ino=20124614, mode=drwxr-xr-x , nlink=3, uid=9874, gid=929, rdev=0, atime=1228844788, stime=1227555769, ctime=1228845828.326650000, birthtime=0, size=4096, blksize=4096, blocks=8, flags=0x0 } > 1660 rm 1229033597.287166 RET fstat 0 > 1660 rm 1229033597.287171 CALL fcntl(0x4,F_SETFD,FD_CLOEXEC) > 1660 rm 1229033597.287177 RET fcntl 0 > 1660 rm 1229033597.287187 CALL fstatfs(0x4,0xbfbfe704) > 1660 rm 1229033597.287195 RET fstatfs -1 errno 2 No such file or directory > 1660 rm 1229033597.287202 CALL close(0x4) > 1660 rm 1229033597.287211 RET close 0 > > [Sorry for the long lines....] > > Here we see that the "rm" process (pid 1660) removed a directory > named stvef-paks sucessfully in the interval between 1229033597.283277 > (when the request was made) and 1229033597.285599 (when the 0 return > occurred). The "rm" process proceeds to process a directory named > stvef-server: > > * At 1229033597.285620 it issues a stat(); the successful return > is at 1229033597.286078. > > * At 1229033597.286084 it issues an open(); the successful return > is at 1229033597.287145. The FD is 4. > > * At 1229033597.287154 it issues an fstat() against FD 4; the successful > return is at 1229033597.287166. > > * At 1229033597.287171 it issues an fcntl() against FD 4; the > successful return is at 1229033597.287177. > > * At 1229033597.287187 it issues an fstatfs() against FD 4; the > unsuccessful return is at 1229033597.287195, claiming ENOENT. > > Say WHAT??!? > > I expect to be able to test a bit more promptly now. But is this error transient or permanent ? I.e., would restart of rm successful or failing ? Anyway, this error looks different too.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:38 UTC