[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54068B3A.1090300@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:30:02 +0800
From: Xue jiufei <xuejiufei@...wei.com>
To: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi@...cle.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com" <ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/super.c: do not shrink fs slab during direct memory
reclaim
Hi Junxiao
On 2014/9/3 9:38, Junxiao Bi wrote:
> Hi Jiufei,
>
> On 09/02/2014 05:03 PM, Xue jiufei wrote:
>> Hi, Dave
>> On 2014/9/2 7:51, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:57:22PM +0800, Xue jiufei wrote:
>>>> The patch trys to solve one deadlock problem caused by cluster
>>>> fs, like ocfs2. And the problem may happen at least in the below
>>>> situations:
>>>> 1)Receiving a connect message from other nodes, node queues a
>>>> work_struct o2net_listen_work.
>>>> 2)o2net_wq processes this work and calls sock_alloc() to allocate
>>>> memory for a new socket.
>>>> 3)It would do direct memory reclaim when available memory is not
>>>> enough and trigger the inode cleanup. That inode being cleaned up
>>>> is happened to be ocfs2 inode, so call evict()->ocfs2_evict_inode()
>>>> ->ocfs2_drop_lock()->dlmunlock()->o2net_send_message_vec(),
>>>> and wait for the unlock response from master.
>>>> 4)tcp layer received the response, call o2net_data_ready() and
>>>> queue sc_rx_work, waiting o2net_wq to process this work.
>>>> 5)o2net_wq is a single thread workqueue, it process the work one by
>>>> one. Right now it is still doing o2net_listen_work and cannot handle
>>>> sc_rx_work. so we deadlock.
>>>>
>>>> It is impossible to set GFP_NOFS for memory allocation in sock_alloc().
>>>> So we use PF_FSTRANS to avoid the task reentering filesystem when
>>>> available memory is not enough.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: joyce.xue <xuejiufei@...wei.com>
>>>
>>> For the second time: use memalloc_noio_save/memalloc_noio_restore.
>>> And please put a great big comment in the code explaining why you
>>> need to do this special thing with memory reclaim flags.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Dave.
>>>
>> Thanks for your reply. But I am afraid that memalloc_noio_save/
>> memalloc_noio_restore can not solve my problem. __GFP_IO is cleared
>> if PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO is set and can avoid doing IO in direct memory
>> reclaim. However, __GFP_FS is still set that can not avoid pruning
>> dcache and icache in memory allocation, resulting in the deadlock I
>> described.
>
> You can use PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO to replace PF_FSTRANS, set this flag in
> ocfs2 and check it in sb shrinker.
>
Thanks for your advice. But I think using another process flag is better.
Do you think so? I will send another patch later.
Thanks,
XueJiufei
> Thanks,
> Junxiao.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> XueJiufei
>>
>>
>>
>
> .
>
--
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