From bc2dbc4983afedd198490cca043798f57c93e9bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Qu Wenruo Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 17:46:35 +1030 Subject: [PATCH] btrfs: avoid page_lockend underflow in btrfs_punch_hole_lock_range() [BUG] When running btrfs/004 with 4K fs block size and 64K page size, sometimes fsstress workload can take 100% CPU for a while, but not long enough to trigger a 120s hang warning. [CAUSE] When such 100% CPU usage happens, btrfs_punch_hole_lock_range() is always in the call trace. One example when this problem happens, the function btrfs_punch_hole_lock_range() got the following parameters: lock_start = 4096, lockend = 20469 Then we calculate @page_lockstart by rounding up lock_start to page boundary, which is 64K (page size is 64K). For @page_lockend, we round down the value towards page boundary, which result 0. Then since we need to pass an inclusive end to filemap_range_has_page(), we subtract 1 from the rounded down value, resulting in (u64)-1. In the above case, the range is inside the same page, and we do not even need to call filemap_range_has_page(), not to mention to call it with (u64)-1 at the end. This behavior will cause btrfs_punch_hole_lock_range() to busy loop waiting for irrelevant range to have its pages dropped. [FIX] Calculate @page_lockend by just rounding down @lockend, without decreasing the value by one. So @page_lockend will no longer overflow. Then exit early if @page_lockend is no larger than @page_lockstart. As it means either the range is inside the same page, or the two pages are adjacent already. Finally only decrease @page_lockend when calling filemap_range_has_page(). Fixes: 0528476b6ac7 ("btrfs: fix the filemap_range_has_page() call in btrfs_punch_hole_lock_range()") Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo Signed-off-by: David Sterba --- fs/btrfs/file.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c index 262a707d8990..71b8a825c447 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c @@ -2104,15 +2104,20 @@ static void btrfs_punch_hole_lock_range(struct inode *inode, * will always return true. * So here we need to do extra page alignment for * filemap_range_has_page(). + * + * And do not decrease page_lockend right now, as it can be 0. */ const u64 page_lockstart = round_up(lockstart, PAGE_SIZE); - const u64 page_lockend = round_down(lockend + 1, PAGE_SIZE) - 1; + const u64 page_lockend = round_down(lockend + 1, PAGE_SIZE); while (1) { truncate_pagecache_range(inode, lockstart, lockend); lock_extent(&BTRFS_I(inode)->io_tree, lockstart, lockend, cached_state); + /* The same page or adjacent pages. */ + if (page_lockend <= page_lockstart) + break; /* * We can't have ordered extents in the range, nor dirty/writeback * pages, because we have locked the inode's VFS lock in exclusive @@ -2124,7 +2129,7 @@ static void btrfs_punch_hole_lock_range(struct inode *inode, * we do, unlock the range and retry. */ if (!filemap_range_has_page(inode->i_mapping, page_lockstart, - page_lockend)) + page_lockend - 1)) break; unlock_extent(&BTRFS_I(inode)->io_tree, lockstart, lockend,