diff options
author | Gordon Ross <[email protected]> | 2011-07-26 11:37:06 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]> | 2011-08-01 12:09:11 -0700 |
commit | ef3c1dea7024b07b4ace6115de9f22a99c1394d8 (patch) | |
tree | a0528b9043a6eaf0c7b68e7f51bcbd0016c8cd1b /module/zfs/dbuf.c | |
parent | 7b8518cb8d39aa340fecf559143763b27b212b0d (diff) |
Illumos #764: panic in zfs:dbuf_sync_list
Hypothesis about what's going on here.
At some time in the past, something, i.e. dnode_reallocate()
calls one of:
dbuf_rm_spill(dn, tx);
These will do:
dbuf_rm_spill(dnode_t *dn, dmu_tx_t *tx)
dbuf_free_range(dn, DMU_SPILL_BLKID, DMU_SPILL_BLKID, tx)
dbuf_undirty(db, tx)
Currently dbuf_undirty can leave a spill block in dn_dirty_records[],
(it having been put there previously by dbuf_dirty) and free it.
Sometime later, dbuf_sync_list trips over this reference to free'd
(and typically reused) memory.
Also, dbuf_undirty can call dnode_clear_range with a bogus
block ID. It needs to test for DMU_SPILL_BLKID, similar to
how dnode_clear_range is called in dbuf_dirty().
References to Illumos issue and patch:
- https://www.illumos.org/issues/764
- https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate/commit/3f2366c2bb
Reviewed by: George Wilson <[email protected]>
Reviewed by: [email protected]
Reviewed by: Albert Lee <[email protected]
Approved by: Garrett D'Amore <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]>
Issue #340
Diffstat (limited to 'module/zfs/dbuf.c')
-rw-r--r-- | module/zfs/dbuf.c | 20 |
1 files changed, 16 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/module/zfs/dbuf.c b/module/zfs/dbuf.c index e166c81df..34ce2f62b 100644 --- a/module/zfs/dbuf.c +++ b/module/zfs/dbuf.c @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ */ /* * Copyright (c) 2005, 2010, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. + * Copyright 2011 Nexenta Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. */ #include <sys/zfs_context.h> @@ -1347,13 +1348,17 @@ dbuf_undirty(dmu_buf_impl_t *db, dmu_tx_t *tx) * it, since one of the current holders may be in the * middle of an update. Note that users of dbuf_undirty() * should not place a hold on the dbuf before the call. + * Also note: we can get here with a spill block, so + * test for that similar to how dbuf_dirty does. */ if (refcount_count(&db->db_holds) > db->db_dirtycnt) { mutex_exit(&db->db_mtx); /* Make sure we don't toss this buffer at sync phase */ - mutex_enter(&dn->dn_mtx); - dnode_clear_range(dn, db->db_blkid, 1, tx); - mutex_exit(&dn->dn_mtx); + if (db->db_blkid != DMU_SPILL_BLKID) { + mutex_enter(&dn->dn_mtx); + dnode_clear_range(dn, db->db_blkid, 1, tx); + mutex_exit(&dn->dn_mtx); + } DB_DNODE_EXIT(db); return (0); } @@ -1366,11 +1371,18 @@ dbuf_undirty(dmu_buf_impl_t *db, dmu_tx_t *tx) *drp = dr->dr_next; + /* + * Note that there are three places in dbuf_dirty() + * where this dirty record may be put on a list. + * Make sure to do a list_remove corresponding to + * every one of those list_insert calls. + */ if (dr->dr_parent) { mutex_enter(&dr->dr_parent->dt.di.dr_mtx); list_remove(&dr->dr_parent->dt.di.dr_children, dr); mutex_exit(&dr->dr_parent->dt.di.dr_mtx); - } else if (db->db_level+1 == dn->dn_nlevels) { + } else if (db->db_blkid == DMU_SPILL_BLKID || + db->db_level+1 == dn->dn_nlevels) { ASSERT(db->db_blkptr == NULL || db->db_parent == dn->dn_dbuf); mutex_enter(&dn->dn_mtx); list_remove(&dn->dn_dirty_records[txg & TXG_MASK], dr); |