[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2c2599ec-ac35-6494-aedf-93ecca1969ee@linux.dev>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 15:19:26 +0800
From: Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@...ux.dev>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, logang@...tatee.com,
pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de, agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...nel.org,
song@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
yukuai3@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 1/6] Revert "md: unlock mddev before reap
sync_thread in action_store"
On 3/22/23 14:41, Yu Kuai wrote:
> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
>
> This reverts commit 9dfbdafda3b34e262e43e786077bab8e476a89d1.
>
> Because it will introduce a defect that sync_thread can be running while
> MD_RECOVERY_RUNNING is cleared, which will cause some unexpected problems,
> for example:
>
> list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (ffff0001ac1daba0), but was ffff0000ce1a02a0. (prev=ffff0000ce1a02a0).
> Call trace:
> __list_add_valid+0xfc/0x140
> insert_work+0x78/0x1a0
> __queue_work+0x500/0xcf4
> queue_work_on+0xe8/0x12c
> md_check_recovery+0xa34/0xf30
> raid10d+0xb8/0x900 [raid10]
> md_thread+0x16c/0x2cc
> kthread+0x1a4/0x1ec
> ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
>
> This is because work is requeued while it's still inside workqueue:
If the workqueue subsystem can have such problem because of md flag,
then I have to think workqueue is fragile.
> t1: t2:
> action_store
> mddev_lock
> if (mddev->sync_thread)
> mddev_unlock
> md_unregister_thread
> // first sync_thread is done
> md_check_recovery
> mddev_try_lock
> /*
> * once MD_RECOVERY_DONE is set, new sync_thread
> * can start.
> */
> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_RUNNING, &mddev->recovery)
> INIT_WORK(&mddev->del_work, md_start_sync)
> queue_work(md_misc_wq, &mddev->del_work)
> test_and_set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, ...)
Assume you mean below,
1551 if(!test_and_set_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT, work_data_bits(work))) {
1552 __queue_work(cpu, wq, work);
1553 ret = true;
1554 }
Could you explain how the same work can be re-queued? Isn't the PENDING_BIT
is already set in t3? I believe queue_work shouldn't do that per the comment
but I am not expert ...
Returns %false if @work was already on a queue, %true otherwise.
> // set pending bit
> insert_work
> list_add_tail
> mddev_unlock
> mddev_lock_nointr
> md_reap_sync_thread
> // MD_RECOVERY_RUNNING is cleared
> mddev_unlock
>
> t3:
>
> // before queued work started from t2
> md_check_recovery
> // MD_RECOVERY_RUNNING is not set, a new sync_thread can be started
> INIT_WORK(&mddev->del_work, md_start_sync)
> work->data = 0
> // work pending bit is cleared
> queue_work(md_misc_wq, &mddev->del_work)
> insert_work
> list_add_tail
> // list is corrupted
>
> This patch revert the commit to fix the problem, the deadlock this
> commit tries to fix will be fixed in following patches.
Pls cc the previous users who had encounter the problem to test the
second patch.
And can you share your test which can trigger the re-queued issue?
I'd like to try with latest mainline such as 6.3-rc3, and your test is
not only run against 5.10 kernel as you described before, right?
Thanks,
Guoqing
Powered by blists - more mailing lists