linux-kernel - Re: stalling IO regression since linux 5.12, through 5.18

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: <8b361f8e-cc4f-466c-90f0-031a43436af2@www.fastmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Aug 2022 07:57:07 -0400
From:   "Chris Murphy" <lists@...orremedies.com>
To:     Holger Hoffstätte <holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>,
        "Nikolay Borisov" <nborisov@...e.com>,
        "Jens Axboe" <axboe@...nel.dk>, "Jan Kara" <jack@...e.cz>,
        "Paolo Valente" <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Cc:     Linux-RAID <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Josef Bacik" <josef@...icpanda.com>
Subject: Re: stalling IO regression since linux 5.12, through 5.18



On Wed, Aug 17, 2022, at 5:52 AM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On 2022-08-16 17:34, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2022, at 11:25 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>> How about changing the scheduler either mq-deadline or noop, just
>>> to see if this is also reproducible with a different scheduler. I
>>> guess noop would imply the blk cgroup controller is going to be
>>> disabled
>> 
>> I already reported on that: always happens with bfq within an hour or
>> less. Doesn't happen with mq-deadline for ~25+ hours. Does happen
>> with bfq with the above patches removed. Does happen with
>> cgroup.disabled=io set.
>> 
>> Sounds to me like it's something bfq depends on and is somehow
>> becoming perturbed in a way that mq-deadline does not, and has
>> changed between 5.11 and 5.12. I have no idea what's under bfq that
>> matches this description.
>
> Chris, just a shot in the dark but can you try the patch from
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20220803121504.212071-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com/
>
> on top of something more recent than 5.12? Ideally 5.19 where it applies
> cleanly.

The problem doesn't reliably reproduce on 5.19. A patch for 5.12..5.18 would be much more testable.


-- 
Chris Murphy