[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d38a53d6-1f10-4c72-b5f0-88d612093e83@huawei.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 11:00:11 +0800
From: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>, "anna@...nel.org"
<anna@...nel.org>
CC: "houtao1@...wei.com" <houtao1@...wei.com>, "yukuai1@...weicloud.com"
<yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, "yangerkun@...wei.com" <yangerkun@...wei.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"lilingfeng@...weicloud.com" <lilingfeng@...weicloud.com>,
"jlayton@...nel.org" <jlayton@...nel.org>, "linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>, "yi.zhang@...wei.com" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFSv4: Fix deadlock during the running of state manager
在 2024/12/18 1:00, Trond Myklebust 写道:
> On Fri, 2024-12-13 at 11:59 +0800, Li Lingfeng wrote:
>> Unlinking file may cause the following deadlock in state manager:
>> [root@...alhost test]# cat /proc/2943/stack
>> [<0>] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x1a/0x90
>> [<0>] _nfs4_proc_delegreturn+0x60f/0x760
>> [<0>] nfs4_proc_delegreturn+0x13d/0x2a0
>> [<0>] nfs_do_return_delegation+0xba/0x110
>> [<0>] nfs_end_delegation_return+0x32c/0x620
>> [<0>] nfs_complete_unlink+0xc7/0x290
>> [<0>] nfs_dentry_iput+0x36/0x50
>> [<0>] __dentry_kill+0xaa/0x250
>> [<0>] dput.part.0+0x26c/0x4d0
>> [<0>] __put_nfs_open_context+0x1d9/0x260
>> [<0>] nfs4_open_reclaim+0x77/0xa0
>> [<0>] nfs4_do_reclaim+0x385/0xf40
>> [<0>] nfs4_state_manager+0x762/0x14e0
>> [<0>] nfs4_run_state_manager+0x181/0x330
>> [<0>] kthread+0x1a7/0x1f0
>> [<0>] ret_from_fork+0x34/0x60
>> [<0>] ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
>> [root@...alhost test]#
>>
>> It can be reproduced by following steps:
>> 1) client: open file
>> 2) client: unlink file
>> 3) server: service restart(trigger state manager in client)
>> 4) client: close file(in nfs4_open_reclaim, between
>> nfs4_do_open_reclaim
>> and put_nfs_open_context)
>>
>> Since the file has been open, unlinking will just set
>> DCACHE_NFSFS_RENAMED
>> for the dentry like this:
>> nfs_unlink
>> nfs_sillyrename
>> nfs_async_unlink
>> // set DCACHE_NFSFS_RENAMED
>>
>> Restarting service will trigger state manager in client.
>> (1) NFS4_SLOT_TBL_DRAINING will be set to nfs4_slot_table since
>> session
>> has been reset.
>> (2) DCACHE_NFSFS_RENAMED is detected in nfs_dentry_iput. Therefore,
>> nfs_complete_unlink is called to trigger delegation return.
>> (3) Due to the slot table being in draining state and sa_privileged
>> being
>> 0, the delegation return will be queued and wait.
>> nfs4_state_manager
>> nfs4_reset_session
>> nfs4_begin_drain_session
>> nfs4_drain_slot_tbl
>> // set NFS4_SLOT_TBL_DRAINING (1)
>> nfs4_do_reclaim
>> nfs4_open_reclaim
>> __put_nfs_open_context
>> __dentry_kill
>> nfs_dentry_iput // check DCACHE_NFSFS_RENAMED (2)
>> nfs_complete_unlink
>> nfs_end_delegation_return
>> nfs_do_return_delegation
>> nfs4_proc_delegreturn
>> _nfs4_proc_delegreturn
>> rpc_run_task
>> ...
>> nfs4_delegreturn_prepare
>> nfs4_setup_sequence
>> nfs4_slot_tbl_draining // check NFS4_SLOT_TBL_DRAINING
>> // and sa_privileged is 0 (3)
>> rpc_sleep_on // set queued and add to slot_tbl_waitq
>> // rpc_task is async and wait in __rpc_execute
>> rpc_wait_for_completion_task
>> __rpc_wait_for_completion_task
>> out_of_line_wait_on_bit
>> rpc_wait_bit_killable // wait for rpc_task to complete
>> <-------- can not get here to wake up rpc_task -------->
>> nfs4_end_drain_session
>> nfs4_end_drain_slot_table
>> nfs41_wake_slot_table
>>
>> On the one hand, the state manager is blocked by the unfinished
>> delegation
>> return. As a result, nfs4_end_drain_session cannot be invoked to
>> clear
>> NFS4_SLOT_TBL_DRAINING and wake up waiting tasks.
>> On the other hand, since NFS4_SLOT_TBL_DRAINING is not cleared,
>> delegation return can only wait in the queue, resulting in a
>> deadlock.
>>
>> Fix it by turning the delegation return into a privileged operation
>> for
>> the case where the nfs_client is in NFS4CLNT_RECLAIM_REBOOT state.
>>
>> Fixes: 977fcc2b0b41 ("NFS: Add a delegation return into
>> nfs4_proc_unlink_setup()")
>> Signed-off-by: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> index 405f17e6e0b4..f3b1f2725c4e 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> @@ -6878,7 +6878,7 @@ static int _nfs4_proc_delegreturn(struct inode
>> *inode, const struct cred *cred,
>> data->res.sattr_res = true;
>> }
>>
>> - if (!data->inode)
>> + if (!data->inode || test_bit(NFS4CLNT_RECLAIM_REBOOT,
>> &server->nfs_client->cl_state))
>> nfs4_init_sequence(&data->args.seq_args, &data-
>>> res.seq_res, 1,
>> 1);
>> else
> Rather than make the delegreturn be privileged, it seems better to make
> that delegreturn be asynchronous, just like the unlink itself.
Hi,
In my understanding, the rpc_task in delegreturn has the RPC_TASK_ASYNC
flag set, which means it is already asynchronous.
In the described scenario, delegreturn waiting for this asynchronous
rpc_task to complete caused the deadlock. I'm not entirely clear on what
you mean by 'make that delegreturn be asynchronous.' Could you please
elaborate a bit more on that for better clarity?
Thanks.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists