[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200203104100.16965-3-paolo.valente@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 11:40:55 +0100
From: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bfq-iosched@...glegroups.com, oleksandr@...alenko.name,
patdung100@...il.com, cevich@...hat.com,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH BUGFIX V2 2/7] block, bfq: do not insert oom queue into position tree
BFQ maintains an ordered list, implemented with an RB tree, of
head-request positions of non-empty bfq_queues. This position tree,
inherited from CFQ, is used to find bfq_queues that contain I/O close
to each other. BFQ merges these bfq_queues into a single shared queue,
if this boosts throughput on the device at hand.
There is however a special-purpose bfq_queue that does not participate
in queue merging, the oom bfq_queue. Yet, also this bfq_queue could be
wrongly added to the position tree. So bfqq_find_close() could return
the oom bfq_queue, which is a source of further troubles in an
out-of-memory situation. This commit prevents the oom bfq_queue from
being inserted into the position tree.
Tested-by: Patrick Dung <patdung100@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
---
block/bfq-iosched.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index 55d4328e7c12..15dfb0844644 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -613,6 +613,10 @@ bfq_pos_tree_add_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
bfqq->pos_root = NULL;
}
+ /* oom_bfqq does not participate in queue merging */
+ if (bfqq == &bfqd->oom_bfqq)
+ return;
+
/*
* bfqq cannot be merged any longer (see comments in
* bfq_setup_cooperator): no point in adding bfqq into the
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists