linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] nbd: Don't use workqueue to handle recv work

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACycT3vz4hYTFpHo0Jphs-xE-k--y63+vedTFAaDRWhpi4_5rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Mar 2022 19:21:25 +0800
From:   Yongji Xie <xieyongji@...edance.com>
To:     Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, nbd@...er.debian.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] nbd: Don't use workqueue to handle recv work

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 4:11 AM Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 05:12:41PM +0800, Xie Yongji wrote:
> > The rescuer thread might take over the works queued on
> > the workqueue when the worker thread creation timed out.
> > If this happens, we have no chance to create multiple
> > recv threads which causes I/O hung on this nbd device.
> >
> > To fix it, we can not simply remove the WQ_MEM_RECLAIM
> > flag since the recv work is in the memory reclaim path.
> > So this patch tries to create kthreads directly to
> > handle the recv work instead of using workqueue.
> >
>
> I still don't understand why we can't drop WQ_MEM_RECLAIM.  IIRC your argument
> is that we need it because a reconnect could happen under memory pressure and we
> need to be able to queue work for that.  However your code makes it so we're
> just doing a kthread_create(), which isn't coming out of some emergency pool, so
> it's just as likely to fail as a !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue.  Thanks,
>

I think the key point is the context in which the work thread is
created. It's the context of the nbd process if using kthread_create()
to create a workthread (might do some allocation). Then we can benefit
from the PR_SET_IO_FLUSHER flag, so memory reclaim would never hit the
page cache on the nbd device. But using queue_work() to create a
workthread, the actual thread creation happens in the context of the
work thread rather than the nbd process, so we can't rely on the
PR_SET_IO_FLUSHER flag to avoid deadlock.

Thanks,
Yongji