[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190109210111.GZ4205@dastard>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 08:01:12 +1100
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc: darrick.wong@...cle.com, dchinner@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
bfoster@...hat.com, hch@....de, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: silence lockdep false positives when freezing
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 03:53:29PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> Easy to reproduce:
>
> 1. run LTP oom02 workload to let kswapd acquire this locking order:
> fs_reclaim -> sb_internal.
>
> # grep -i fs_reclaim -C 3 /proc/lockdep_chains | grep -C 5 sb_internal
> [00000000826b9172] &type->s_umount_key#27
> [000000005fa8b2ac] sb_pagefaults
> [0000000033f1247e] sb_internal
> [000000009e9a9664] fs_reclaim
>
> 2. freeze XFS.
> # fsfreeze -f /home
>
> Dave mentioned that this is due to a lockdep limitation - "IOWs, this is
> a false positive, caused by the fact that xfs_trans_alloc() is called
> from both above and below memory reclaim as well as within /every level/
> of freeze processing. Lockdep is unable to describe the staged flush
> logic in the freeze process that prevents deadlocks from occurring, and
> hence we will pretty much always see false positives in the freeze
> path....". Hence, just temporarily disable lockdep in that path.
NACK. Turning off lockdep is not a solution, it just prevents
lockdep from finding and reporting real issues.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists