[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <59c125f5-ff40-4a36-b095-b0dbf1a0a3fd@vivo.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 20:28:06 +0800
From: YangYang <yang.yang@...o.com>
To: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] sbitmap: fix io hung due to race on
sbitmap_word::cleared
On 2024/7/3 19:55, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 7/3/24 03:28, Yang Yang wrote:
>> Configuration for sbq:
>> depth=64, wake_batch=6, shift=6, map_nr=1
>>
>> 1. There are 64 requests in progress:
>> map->word = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
>> 2. After all the 64 requests complete, and no more requests come:
>> map->word = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, map->cleared = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
>> 3. Now two tasks try to allocate requests:
>> T1: T2:
>> __blk_mq_get_tag .
>> __sbitmap_queue_get .
>> sbitmap_get .
>> sbitmap_find_bit .
>> sbitmap_find_bit_in_word .
>> __sbitmap_get_word -> nr=-1 __blk_mq_get_tag
>> sbitmap_deferred_clear __sbitmap_queue_get
>> /* map->cleared=0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF */ sbitmap_find_bit
>> if (!READ_ONCE(map->cleared)) sbitmap_find_bit_in_word
>> return false; __sbitmap_get_word -> nr=-1
>> mask = xchg(&map->cleared, 0) sbitmap_deferred_clear
>> atomic_long_andnot() /* map->cleared=0 */
>> if (!(map->cleared))
>> return false;
>> /*
>> * map->cleared is cleared by T1
>> * T2 fail to acquire the tag
>> */
>>
>> 4. T2 is the sole tag waiter. When T1 puts the tag, T2 cannot be woken
>> up due to the wake_batch being set at 6. If no more requests come, T1
>> will wait here indefinitely.
>>
>> This patch achieves two purposes:
>> 1. Check on ->cleared and update on both ->cleared and ->word need to
>> be done atomically, and using spinlock could be the simplest solution.
>> So revert commit 661d4f55a794 ("sbitmap: remove swap_lock"), which
>> may cause potential race.
>>
>> 2. Add extra check in sbitmap_deferred_clear(), to identify whether
>> ->word has free bits.
>>
>> Fixes: 661d4f55a794 ("sbitmap: remove swap_lock")
>
> Is it blamed right? Considering that the revert alone doesn't fix
> the problem, it sounds like the 2nd step might need to be ported
> to kernels even without the blamed commit.
>
Got it. How would you feel about removing
"Fixes: 661d4f55a794 ("sbitmap: remove swap_lock")" and modifying
the commit message as follows?
This patch achieves two purposes:
1. Check on ->cleared and update on both ->cleared and ->word need to
be done atomically, and using spinlock could be the simplest solution.
2. Add extra check in sbitmap_deferred_clear(), to identify whether
->word has free bits.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists