All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
To: Alexander Polakov <apolyakov@beget.ru>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] fs/dcache.c: fix spin lockup issue on nlru->lock
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:37:24 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1498630044-26724-2-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1498630044-26724-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org>

__list_lru_walk_one() acquires nlru spin lock (nlru->lock) for
longer duration if there are more number of items in the lru list.
As per the current code, it can hold the spin lock for upto maximum
UINT_MAX entries at a time. So if there are more number of items in
the lru list, then "BUG: spinlock lockup suspected" is observed in
the below path -

[<ffffff8eca0fb0bc>] spin_bug+0x90
[<ffffff8eca0fb220>] do_raw_spin_lock+0xfc
[<ffffff8ecafb7798>] _raw_spin_lock+0x28
[<ffffff8eca1ae884>] list_lru_add+0x28
[<ffffff8eca1f5dac>] dput+0x1c8
[<ffffff8eca1eb46c>] path_put+0x20
[<ffffff8eca1eb73c>] terminate_walk+0x3c
[<ffffff8eca1eee58>] path_lookupat+0x100
[<ffffff8eca1f00fc>] filename_lookup+0x6c
[<ffffff8eca1f0264>] user_path_at_empty+0x54
[<ffffff8eca1e066c>] SyS_faccessat+0xd0
[<ffffff8eca084e30>] el0_svc_naked+0x24

This nlru->lock is acquired by another CPU in this path -

[<ffffff8eca1f5fd0>] d_lru_shrink_move+0x34
[<ffffff8eca1f6180>] dentry_lru_isolate_shrink+0x48
[<ffffff8eca1aeafc>] __list_lru_walk_one.isra.10+0x94
[<ffffff8eca1aec34>] list_lru_walk_node+0x40
[<ffffff8eca1f6620>] shrink_dcache_sb+0x60
[<ffffff8eca1e56a8>] do_remount_sb+0xbc
[<ffffff8eca1e583c>] do_emergency_remount+0xb0
[<ffffff8eca0ba510>] process_one_work+0x228
[<ffffff8eca0bb158>] worker_thread+0x2e0
[<ffffff8eca0c040c>] kthread+0xf4
[<ffffff8eca084dd0>] ret_from_fork+0x10

Fix this lockup by reducing the number of entries to be shrinked
from the lru list to 1024 at once. Also, add cond_resched() before
processing the lru list again.

Link: http://marc.info/?t=149722864900001&r=1&w=2
Fix-suggested-by: Jan kara <jack@suse.cz>
Fix-suggested-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
---
v3: use list_lru_count() instead of freed in while loop to
cover an extreme case where a single invocation of list_lru_walk()
can skip all 1024 dentries, in which case 'freed' will be 0 forcing
us to break the loop prematurely. 

v2: patch shrink_dcache_sb() instead of list_lru_walk()
---

 fs/dcache.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/dcache.c b/fs/dcache.c
index a9f995f..1161390 100644
--- a/fs/dcache.c
+++ b/fs/dcache.c
@@ -1133,11 +1133,12 @@ void shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb)
 		LIST_HEAD(dispose);
 
 		freed = list_lru_walk(&sb->s_dentry_lru,
-			dentry_lru_isolate_shrink, &dispose, UINT_MAX);
+			dentry_lru_isolate_shrink, &dispose, 1024);
 
 		this_cpu_sub(nr_dentry_unused, freed);
 		shrink_dentry_list(&dispose);
-	} while (freed > 0);
+		cond_resched();
+	} while (list_lru_count(&sb->s_dentry_lru) > 0);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(shrink_dcache_sb);
 
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
To: Alexander Polakov <apolyakov@beget.ru>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] fs/dcache.c: fix spin lockup issue on nlru->lock
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:37:24 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1498630044-26724-2-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1498630044-26724-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org>

__list_lru_walk_one() acquires nlru spin lock (nlru->lock) for
longer duration if there are more number of items in the lru list.
As per the current code, it can hold the spin lock for upto maximum
UINT_MAX entries at a time. So if there are more number of items in
the lru list, then "BUG: spinlock lockup suspected" is observed in
the below path -

[<ffffff8eca0fb0bc>] spin_bug+0x90
[<ffffff8eca0fb220>] do_raw_spin_lock+0xfc
[<ffffff8ecafb7798>] _raw_spin_lock+0x28
[<ffffff8eca1ae884>] list_lru_add+0x28
[<ffffff8eca1f5dac>] dput+0x1c8
[<ffffff8eca1eb46c>] path_put+0x20
[<ffffff8eca1eb73c>] terminate_walk+0x3c
[<ffffff8eca1eee58>] path_lookupat+0x100
[<ffffff8eca1f00fc>] filename_lookup+0x6c
[<ffffff8eca1f0264>] user_path_at_empty+0x54
[<ffffff8eca1e066c>] SyS_faccessat+0xd0
[<ffffff8eca084e30>] el0_svc_naked+0x24

This nlru->lock is acquired by another CPU in this path -

[<ffffff8eca1f5fd0>] d_lru_shrink_move+0x34
[<ffffff8eca1f6180>] dentry_lru_isolate_shrink+0x48
[<ffffff8eca1aeafc>] __list_lru_walk_one.isra.10+0x94
[<ffffff8eca1aec34>] list_lru_walk_node+0x40
[<ffffff8eca1f6620>] shrink_dcache_sb+0x60
[<ffffff8eca1e56a8>] do_remount_sb+0xbc
[<ffffff8eca1e583c>] do_emergency_remount+0xb0
[<ffffff8eca0ba510>] process_one_work+0x228
[<ffffff8eca0bb158>] worker_thread+0x2e0
[<ffffff8eca0c040c>] kthread+0xf4
[<ffffff8eca084dd0>] ret_from_fork+0x10

Fix this lockup by reducing the number of entries to be shrinked
from the lru list to 1024 at once. Also, add cond_resched() before
processing the lru list again.

Link: http://marc.info/?t=149722864900001&r=1&w=2
Fix-suggested-by: Jan kara <jack@suse.cz>
Fix-suggested-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
---
v3: use list_lru_count() instead of freed in while loop to
cover an extreme case where a single invocation of list_lru_walk()
can skip all 1024 dentries, in which case 'freed' will be 0 forcing
us to break the loop prematurely. 

v2: patch shrink_dcache_sb() instead of list_lru_walk()
---

 fs/dcache.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/dcache.c b/fs/dcache.c
index a9f995f..1161390 100644
--- a/fs/dcache.c
+++ b/fs/dcache.c
@@ -1133,11 +1133,12 @@ void shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb)
 		LIST_HEAD(dispose);
 
 		freed = list_lru_walk(&sb->s_dentry_lru,
-			dentry_lru_isolate_shrink, &dispose, UINT_MAX);
+			dentry_lru_isolate_shrink, &dispose, 1024);
 
 		this_cpu_sub(nr_dentry_unused, freed);
 		shrink_dentry_list(&dispose);
-	} while (freed > 0);
+		cond_resched();
+	} while (list_lru_count(&sb->s_dentry_lru) > 0);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(shrink_dcache_sb);
 
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-28  6:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-12  0:47 [PATCH] mm/list_lru.c: use cond_resched_lock() for nlru->lock Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-12  0:47 ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-12 13:11 ` Jan Kara
2017-06-12 13:11   ` Jan Kara
2017-06-15 21:05 ` Andrew Morton
2017-06-15 21:05   ` Andrew Morton
2017-06-16 14:44   ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-16 14:44     ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-17 11:14   ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-17 11:14     ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-20  2:52     ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-20  2:52       ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-21  6:39       ` [PATCH v2] fs/dcache.c: fix spin lockup issue on nlru->lock Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-21  6:39         ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-21 16:31         ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-21 16:31           ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-22 16:31           ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-22 16:31             ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-22 17:49             ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-22 17:49               ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-28  6:07               ` [PATCH v3 1/2] mm/list_lru.c: fix list_lru_count_node() to be race free Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-28  6:07                 ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-28  6:07                 ` Sahitya Tummala [this message]
2017-06-28  6:07                   ` [PATCH v3 2/2] fs/dcache.c: fix spin lockup issue on nlru->lock Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-28 17:18                 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] mm/list_lru.c: fix list_lru_count_node() to be race free Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-28 17:18                   ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-29  3:39                   ` [PATCH v4 " Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-29  3:39                     ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-07-01 16:28                     ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-07-01 16:28                       ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-06-29  3:39                   ` [PATCH v4 2/2] fs/dcache.c: fix spin lockup issue on nlru->lock Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-29  3:39                     ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-29 22:48                     ` Andrew Morton
2017-06-29 22:48                       ` Andrew Morton
2017-06-30  3:16                       ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-06-30  3:16                         ` Sahitya Tummala
2017-07-01 16:28                     ` Vladimir Davydov
2017-07-01 16:28                       ` Vladimir Davydov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1498630044-26724-2-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org \
    --to=stummala@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=apolyakov@beget.ru \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.