Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH v3] iwcm: don't hold the irq disabled lock on iw_rem_ref

From: "Bernard Metzler" <BMT@zurich.ibm.com>
To: "Krishnamraju Eraparaju" <krishna2@chelsio.com>
Cc: "Steve Wise" <larrystevenwise@gmail.com>,
	"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	"Sagi Grimberg" <sagi@grimberg.me>,
	"linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Nirranjan Kirubaharan" <nirranjan@chelsio.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH v3] iwcm: don't hold the irq disabled lock on iw_rem_ref
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 13:40:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <OF4A250815.36D6F256-ON00258478.00487431-00258478.004B157C@notes.na.collabserv.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190917124719.GA11070@chelsio.com>

-----"Krishnamraju Eraparaju" <krishna2@chelsio.com> wrote: -----

>To: "Bernard Metzler" <BMT@zurich.ibm.com>, "Steve Wise"
><larrystevenwise@gmail.com>
>From: "Krishnamraju Eraparaju" <krishna2@chelsio.com>
>Date: 09/17/2019 02:48PM
>Cc: "Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca>, "Sagi Grimberg"
><sagi@grimberg.me>, "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org"
><linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>, "Nirranjan Kirubaharan"
><nirranjan@chelsio.com>
>Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: Re: [PATCH v3] iwcm: don't hold the irq
>disabled lock on iw_rem_ref
>
>On Tuesday, September 09/17/19, 2019 at 14:34:24 +0530, Bernard
>Metzler wrote:
>> -----"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca> wrote: -----
>> 
>> >To: "Krishnamraju Eraparaju" <krishna2@chelsio.com>
>> >From: "Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca>
>> >Date: 09/16/2019 06:28PM
>> >Cc: "Steve Wise" <larrystevenwise@gmail.com>, "Bernard Metzler"
>> ><BMT@zurich.ibm.com>, "Sagi Grimberg" <sagi@grimberg.me>,
>> >"linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>
>> >Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: [PATCH v3] iwcm: don't hold the irq
>> >disabled lock on iw_rem_ref
>> >
>> >On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:28:16PM +0530, Krishnamraju Eraparaju
>> >wrote:
>> >> Hi Steve & Bernard,
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks for the review comments.
>> >> I will do those formating changes.
>> >
>> >I don't see anything in patchworks, but the consensus is to drop
>> >Sagi's patch pending this future patch?
>> >
>> >Jason
>> >
>> This is my impression as well. But consensus should be
>> explicit...Sagi, what do you think?
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Bernard.
>> 
>While testing iSER(with my proposed patch applied) I see Chelsio
>iwarp
>driver is hitting the below deadlock issue. This is due to iw_rem_ref
>reordering changes in IWCM.
>
>Bernard, how about replacing vmalloc/vfree with kmalloc/kfree,
>such that freeing of SIW qp resources can be done with spinlocks
>held?
>to fix the orginal vfree issue less invasively..

Well, I'd really like to avoid kmalloc on potentially
large data structures when there is no need to have
physically contiguous memory.

I could of course move that vfree out to a worker.
Simple, but not really nice though.

So it seems it would be no good option to restructure
the Chelsio driver?

Thanks
Bernard.

>
>Steve, any suggestions?
>
>
>[ 1230.161871] INFO: task kworker/u12:0:11291 blocked for more than
>122
>seconds.
>[ 1230.162147]       Not tainted 5.3.0-rc5+ #19
>[ 1230.162417] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs"
>disables this message.
>[ 1230.162911] kworker/u12:0   D13000 11291      2 0x80004080
>[ 1230.163186] Workqueue: iw_cm_wq cm_work_handler
>[ 1230.163456] Call Trace:
>[ 1230.163718]  ? __schedule+0x297/0x510
>[ 1230.163986]  schedule+0x2e/0x90
>[ 1230.164253]  schedule_timeout+0x1c0/0x280
>[ 1230.164520]  ? xas_store+0x23e/0x500
>[ 1230.164789]  wait_for_completion+0xa2/0x110
>[ 1230.165067]  ? wake_up_q+0x70/0x70
>[ 1230.165336]  c4iw_destroy_qp+0x141/0x260 [iw_cxgb4]
>[ 1230.165611]  ? xas_store+0x23e/0x500
>[ 1230.165893]  ? _cond_resched+0x10/0x20
>[ 1230.166160]  ? wait_for_completion+0x2e/0x110
>[ 1230.166432]  ib_destroy_qp_user+0x142/0x230
>[ 1230.166699]  rdma_destroy_qp+0x1f/0x40
>[ 1230.166966]  iser_free_ib_conn_res+0x52/0x190 [ib_iser]
>[ 1230.167241]  iser_cleanup_handler.isra.15+0x32/0x60 [ib_iser]
>[ 1230.167510]  iser_cma_handler+0x23b/0x730 [ib_iser]
>[ 1230.167776]  cma_iw_handler+0x154/0x1e0
>[ 1230.168037]  cm_work_handler+0xb4c/0xd60
>[ 1230.168302]  process_one_work+0x155/0x380
>[ 1230.168564]  worker_thread+0x41/0x3b0
>[ 1230.168827]  kthread+0xf3/0x130
>[ 1230.169086]  ? process_one_work+0x380/0x380
>[ 1230.169350]  ? kthread_bind+0x10/0x10
>[ 1230.169615]  ret_from_fork+0x35/0x40
>[ 1230.169885] NMI backtrace for cpu 3
>
>