Gargi Jaiswal created HDDS-15066:
------------------------------------

             Summary: Read-Write Lock race leave stale references to container 
creating orphan replicas
                 Key: HDDS-15066
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-15066
             Project: Apache Ozone
          Issue Type: Bug
            Reporter: Gargi Jaiswal
            Assignee: Gargi Jaiswal


On a datanode, some work runs under a container {color:#de350b}read lock{color} 
(or otherwise changes which replica directory / in-memory {{Container}} is 
authoritative) while other threads look up a container once and later take a 
{color:#de350b}write lock{color}. If the in-memory container mapping or on-disk 
location changes in between, the second thread can still use a stale 
*{{Container}}* or *{{KeyValueContainerData}}* reference. That is a classic 
*TOCTOU* problem: the map and the caller disagree about where the replica lives.

Worst cases include wrong {{*ContainerSet*}} updates, deleting or updating the 
wrong paths, ghost / orphan replica data on disk that SCM no longer tracks, and 
block deletion targeting the wrong RocksDB/chunks tree so pending deletes on 
the live replica are never applied (space not reclaimed).

Applies to CLOSED and QUASI_CLOSED (and any path where balancing/replication 
overlaps lifecycle commands), not a single state.

*This can be easily explained with help of DiskBalancer as an example, although 
it applies to other read write races as well:*
While {color:#de350b}DiskBalance{color}r moves a container between volumes on 
the same datanode, it {*}holds the container read lock{*}, copies data, then 
calls *{{ContainerSet.updateContainer(...)}}* to point the *in-memory map* at a 
new {{Container}} instance (new volume / paths).
Whereas it is seen that other threads often look up the *container once*, then 
block {color:#de350b}on {{writeLock()}}{color} until the move finishes. After 
they unblock, they still hold a reference to the old container (source volume). 
They then run logic and/or *{{removeContainer(containerId)}}* using stale paths 
and stale object identity.

*Impacts:*
**
 * *Replication Manager {{{}DeleteContainerCommand{}}}:* can remove the wrong 
map entry (live replica on the destination volume), delete/move source files, 
and leave an orphan replica on disk that SCM no longer sees — plus wrong volume 
accounting and ICRs keyed off the old replica.
 * *{{{}BlockDeletingTask{}}}:* uses a task-scoped *{{KeyValueContainerData}}* 
snapshot (source paths) while {{getContainer()}} may return the new replica; 
block cleanup can target the wrong chunks path and never clear pending-deletion 
state on the live replica → space not reclaimed.

*Suggested Fix:*

For RM side: After acquiring writeLock(), {*}re-fetch from the map and compare 
by identity{*}. If they differ, the container was moved — abort and let the 
caller retry.

{code:java}
container.writeLock();
try {    
Container<?> current containerSet.getContainer( 
container.getContainerData().getContainerID());
if (current != container) { 
       
// Container was relocated by DiskBalancer while we waited for the lock.Our 
reference is stale; the operation will be retried on the next cycle. 
      
 return;    
}    // ... proceed with the actual operation} {code}
For BlockDeletingService:
{code:java}
container.writeLock();

// Re-fetch AFTER lock: map already has disk-B in scenarios.
// current.getContainerData() is disk-B's ContainerData ≠ this.containerData 
(disk-A snapshot).

Container<?> current = containerSet.getContainer(containerData
.getContainerID());
if (current == null || current.getContainerData() != containerData) {   
// containerData is stale — DiskBalancer relocated this container. 
BlockDeletingService will reschedule with disk-B's fresh containerData.

return;
} {code}
 

 

 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to