From nobody Mon Jul 05 11:45:18 2021 X-Original-To: fs@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 299B611FB0C2 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:45:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4GJP4v0HxZz4tCb for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:45:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E38982552B for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:45:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 165BjIlw055835 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:45:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 165BjIaf055834 for fs@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:45:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 256936] Buggy filesystem detected - message wrongly triggered by FUSE filesystems Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2021 11:45:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: chogata@moosefs.pro X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated List-Id: Filesystems List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-fs List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D256936 --- Comment #9 from Agata --- First of all: MooseFS uses FUSE 3 whenever possible (it checks what is available on the system it's compiled on and uses that). And we do try to u= se all the new options and mechanisms available to us. But there is no mechanism that would prevent a network file system that uses cache from overwriting some data if two processes on two machines write to = the same cached block at the same time. I mean, once both kernels have modified= the same frame of cache and want to push the dirty frame to the filesystem, the= re is no way to automagically update/correct one of them. The only solution is= to not use cache at all (BTW, MooseFS client mounted with -o mfscachemode=3DDI= RECT, which translates to each open always setting direct_io to 1 and keep_cache = to 0, still triggers the "buggy" message). But not using cache at all is not a solution, because of performance. The commit you mentioned invalidates all cache, even the dirty frames. IMHO dirty frames should never be invalidated= . It should be left to the users/programmers to make sure they don't modify the = same area of the file (use locks etc.) Or we can say goodbye to any caching... The script I posted as an example is not "correct", in that it doesn't use locks, but it's my (programmer's) "fault" that data gets written to a file without control, not the _network_ filesystem's. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=