[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B815A3D.9040402@canonical.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 17:07:25 +0100
From: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@...onical.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>,
Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
stable-review@...nel.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Stable-review] [93/93] dm mpath: fix stall when requeueing io
Greg KH wrote:
> 2.6.32-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>
>
> commit 9eef87da2a8ea4920e0d913ff977cac064b68ee0 upstream.
>
> This patch fixes the problem that system may stall if target's ->map_rq
> returns DM_MAPIO_REQUEUE in map_request().
> E.g. stall happens on 1 CPU box when a dm-mpath device with queue_if_no_path
> bounces between all-paths-down and paths-up on I/O load.
>
> When target's ->map_rq returns DM_MAPIO_REQUEUE, map_request() requeues
> the request and returns to dm_request_fn(). Then, dm_request_fn()
> doesn't exit the I/O dispatching loop and continues processing
> the requeued request again.
> This map and requeue loop can be done with interrupt disabled,
> so 1 CPU system can be stalled if this situation happens.
>
> For example, commands below can stall my 1 CPU box within 1 minute or so:
> # dmsetup table mp
> mp: 0 2097152 multipath 1 queue_if_no_path 0 1 1 service-time 0 1 2 8:144 1 1
> # while true; do dd if=/dev/mapper/mp of=/dev/null bs=1M count=100; done &
> # while true; do \
> > dmsetup message mp 0 "fail_path 8:144" \
> > dmsetup suspend --noflush mp \
> > dmsetup resume mp \
> > dmsetup message mp 0 "reinstate_path 8:144" \
> > done
>
> To fix the problem above, this patch changes dm_request_fn() to exit
> the I/O dispatching loop once if a request is requeued in map_request().
>
> Signed-off-by: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>
> Signed-off-by: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
>
> ---
> drivers/md/dm.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/drivers/md/dm.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/dm.c
> @@ -1487,11 +1487,15 @@ static int dm_prep_fn(struct request_que
> return BLKPREP_OK;
> }
>
> -static void map_request(struct dm_target *ti, struct request *rq,
> - struct mapped_device *md)
> +/*
> + * Returns:
> + * 0 : the request has been processed (not requeued)
> + * !0 : the request has been requeued
> + */
> +static int map_request(struct dm_target *ti, struct request *clone,
> + struct mapped_device *md)
> {
> - int r;
> - struct request *clone = rq->special;
This change requires the argument to this function to be a rq->special
pointer. This is changed in the map_request function by the following
patch:
commit b4324feeae304ae39e631a254d238a7d63be004b
Author: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>
Date: Thu Dec 10 23:52:16 2009 +0000
dm: use md pending for in flight IO counting
> + int r, requeued = 0;
> struct dm_rq_target_io *tio = clone->end_io_data;
>
> /*
> @@ -1516,6 +1520,7 @@ static void map_request(struct dm_target
> case DM_MAPIO_REQUEUE:
> /* The target wants to requeue the I/O */
> dm_requeue_unmapped_request(clone);
> + requeued = 1;
> break;
> default:
> if (r > 0) {
> @@ -1527,6 +1532,8 @@ static void map_request(struct dm_target
> dm_kill_unmapped_request(clone, r);
> break;
> }
> +
> + return requeued;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -1568,12 +1575,16 @@ static void dm_request_fn(struct request
>
> blk_start_request(rq);
> spin_unlock(q->queue_lock);
> - map_request(ti, rq, md);
> + if (map_request(ti, rq, md))
> + goto requeued;
> spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> }
That is the current state of dm_request_function:
clone = rq->special;
atomic_inc(&md->pending[rq_data_dir(clone)]);
spin_unlock(q->queue_lock);
if (map_request(ti, clone, md))
While looking over the code I also noticed that the spinlock is dropped with
spin_unlock and then reacquired with spin_lock_irq. Isn't the irq version too
much in that case? Or was the intention to have interrupts enabled when unlocking?
-Stefan
> goto out;
>
> +requeued:
> + spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> +
> plug_and_out:
> if (!elv_queue_empty(q))
> /* Some requests still remain, retry later */
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stable-review mailing list
> Stable-review@...ux.kernel.org
> http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable-review
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists