All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dax: Make cache flushing protected by entry lock
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 15:44:45 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160624214445.GA20730@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1466523915-14644-2-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 05:45:13PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Currently, flushing of caches for DAX mappings was ignoring entry lock.
> So far this was ok (modulo a bug that a difference in entry lock could
> cause cache flushing to be mistakenly skipped) but in the following
> patches we will write-protect PTEs on cache flushing and clear dirty
> tags. For that we will need more exclusion. So do cache flushing under
> an entry lock. This allows us to remove one lock-unlock pair of
> mapping->tree_lock as a bonus.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> ---
>  fs/dax.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>  1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> index 761495bf5eb9..5209f8cd0bee 100644
> --- a/fs/dax.c
> +++ b/fs/dax.c
> @@ -669,35 +669,54 @@ static int dax_writeback_one(struct block_device *bdev,
>  		struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index, void *entry)
>  {
>  	struct radix_tree_root *page_tree = &mapping->page_tree;
> -	int type = RADIX_DAX_TYPE(entry);
> -	struct radix_tree_node *node;
> +	int type;
>  	struct blk_dax_ctl dax;
> -	void **slot;
>  	int ret = 0;
> +	void *entry2, **slot;

Nit: Let's retain the "reverse X-mas tree" ordering of our variable
definitions.

> -	spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  	/*
> -	 * Regular page slots are stabilized by the page lock even
> -	 * without the tree itself locked.  These unlocked entries
> -	 * need verification under the tree lock.
> +	 * A page got tagged dirty in DAX mapping? Something is seriously
> +	 * wrong.
>  	 */
> -	if (!__radix_tree_lookup(page_tree, index, &node, &slot))
> -		goto unlock;
> -	if (*slot != entry)
> -		goto unlock;
> -
> -	/* another fsync thread may have already written back this entry */
> -	if (!radix_tree_tag_get(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE))
> -		goto unlock;
> +	if (WARN_ON(!radix_tree_exceptional_entry(entry)))
> +		return -EIO;
>  
> +	spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> +	entry2 = get_unlocked_mapping_entry(mapping, index, &slot);
> +	/* Entry got punched out / reallocated? */
> +	if (!entry2 || !radix_tree_exceptional_entry(entry2))
> +		goto put_unlock;
> +	/*
> +	 * Entry got reallocated elsewhere? No need to writeback. We have to
> +	 * compare sectors as we must not bail out due to difference in lockbit
> +	 * or entry type.
> +	 */
> +	if (RADIX_DAX_SECTOR(entry2) != RADIX_DAX_SECTOR(entry))
> +		goto put_unlock;
> +	type = RADIX_DAX_TYPE(entry2);
>  	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(type != RADIX_DAX_PTE && type != RADIX_DAX_PMD)) {
>  		ret = -EIO;
> -		goto unlock;
> +		goto put_unlock;
>  	}
> +	entry = entry2;

I don't think you need to set 'entry' here - you reset it in 4 lines via
lock_slot(), and don't use it in between.

> +
> +	/* Another fsync thread may have already written back this entry */
> +	if (!radix_tree_tag_get(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE))
> +		goto put_unlock;
> +	/* Lock the entry to serialize with page faults */
> +	entry = lock_slot(mapping, slot);

As of this patch nobody unlocks the slot.  :)  A quick test of "write, fsync,
fsync" confirms that it deadlocks.

You introduce the proper calls to unlock the slot via
put_locked_mapping_entry() in patch 3/3 - those probably need to be in this
patch instead.

> +	/*
> +	 * We can clear the tag now but we have to be careful so that concurrent
> +	 * dax_writeback_one() calls for the same index cannot finish before we
> +	 * actually flush the caches. This is achieved as the calls will look
> +	 * at the entry only under tree_lock and once they do that they will
> +	 * see the entry locked and wait for it to unlock.
> +	 */
> +	radix_tree_tag_clear(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE);
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  
>  	dax.sector = RADIX_DAX_SECTOR(entry);
>  	dax.size = (type == RADIX_DAX_PMD ? PMD_SIZE : PAGE_SIZE);
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * We cannot hold tree_lock while calling dax_map_atomic() because it
> @@ -713,15 +732,12 @@ static int dax_writeback_one(struct block_device *bdev,
>  	}
>  
>  	wb_cache_pmem(dax.addr, dax.size);
> -
> -	spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> -	radix_tree_tag_clear(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE);
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> - unmap:
> +unmap:
>  	dax_unmap_atomic(bdev, &dax);
>  	return ret;
>  
> - unlock:
> +put_unlock:
> +	put_unlocked_mapping_entry(mapping, index, entry2);
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.6.6
> 
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dax: Make cache flushing protected by entry lock
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 15:44:45 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160624214445.GA20730@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1466523915-14644-2-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 05:45:13PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Currently, flushing of caches for DAX mappings was ignoring entry lock.
> So far this was ok (modulo a bug that a difference in entry lock could
> cause cache flushing to be mistakenly skipped) but in the following
> patches we will write-protect PTEs on cache flushing and clear dirty
> tags. For that we will need more exclusion. So do cache flushing under
> an entry lock. This allows us to remove one lock-unlock pair of
> mapping->tree_lock as a bonus.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> ---
>  fs/dax.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>  1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> index 761495bf5eb9..5209f8cd0bee 100644
> --- a/fs/dax.c
> +++ b/fs/dax.c
> @@ -669,35 +669,54 @@ static int dax_writeback_one(struct block_device *bdev,
>  		struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index, void *entry)
>  {
>  	struct radix_tree_root *page_tree = &mapping->page_tree;
> -	int type = RADIX_DAX_TYPE(entry);
> -	struct radix_tree_node *node;
> +	int type;
>  	struct blk_dax_ctl dax;
> -	void **slot;
>  	int ret = 0;
> +	void *entry2, **slot;

Nit: Let's retain the "reverse X-mas tree" ordering of our variable
definitions.

> -	spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  	/*
> -	 * Regular page slots are stabilized by the page lock even
> -	 * without the tree itself locked.  These unlocked entries
> -	 * need verification under the tree lock.
> +	 * A page got tagged dirty in DAX mapping? Something is seriously
> +	 * wrong.
>  	 */
> -	if (!__radix_tree_lookup(page_tree, index, &node, &slot))
> -		goto unlock;
> -	if (*slot != entry)
> -		goto unlock;
> -
> -	/* another fsync thread may have already written back this entry */
> -	if (!radix_tree_tag_get(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE))
> -		goto unlock;
> +	if (WARN_ON(!radix_tree_exceptional_entry(entry)))
> +		return -EIO;
>  
> +	spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> +	entry2 = get_unlocked_mapping_entry(mapping, index, &slot);
> +	/* Entry got punched out / reallocated? */
> +	if (!entry2 || !radix_tree_exceptional_entry(entry2))
> +		goto put_unlock;
> +	/*
> +	 * Entry got reallocated elsewhere? No need to writeback. We have to
> +	 * compare sectors as we must not bail out due to difference in lockbit
> +	 * or entry type.
> +	 */
> +	if (RADIX_DAX_SECTOR(entry2) != RADIX_DAX_SECTOR(entry))
> +		goto put_unlock;
> +	type = RADIX_DAX_TYPE(entry2);
>  	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(type != RADIX_DAX_PTE && type != RADIX_DAX_PMD)) {
>  		ret = -EIO;
> -		goto unlock;
> +		goto put_unlock;
>  	}
> +	entry = entry2;

I don't think you need to set 'entry' here - you reset it in 4 lines via
lock_slot(), and don't use it in between.

> +
> +	/* Another fsync thread may have already written back this entry */
> +	if (!radix_tree_tag_get(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE))
> +		goto put_unlock;
> +	/* Lock the entry to serialize with page faults */
> +	entry = lock_slot(mapping, slot);

As of this patch nobody unlocks the slot.  :)  A quick test of "write, fsync,
fsync" confirms that it deadlocks.

You introduce the proper calls to unlock the slot via
put_locked_mapping_entry() in patch 3/3 - those probably need to be in this
patch instead.

> +	/*
> +	 * We can clear the tag now but we have to be careful so that concurrent
> +	 * dax_writeback_one() calls for the same index cannot finish before we
> +	 * actually flush the caches. This is achieved as the calls will look
> +	 * at the entry only under tree_lock and once they do that they will
> +	 * see the entry locked and wait for it to unlock.
> +	 */
> +	radix_tree_tag_clear(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE);
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  
>  	dax.sector = RADIX_DAX_SECTOR(entry);
>  	dax.size = (type == RADIX_DAX_PMD ? PMD_SIZE : PAGE_SIZE);
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * We cannot hold tree_lock while calling dax_map_atomic() because it
> @@ -713,15 +732,12 @@ static int dax_writeback_one(struct block_device *bdev,
>  	}
>  
>  	wb_cache_pmem(dax.addr, dax.size);
> -
> -	spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> -	radix_tree_tag_clear(page_tree, index, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE);
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> - unmap:
> +unmap:
>  	dax_unmap_atomic(bdev, &dax);
>  	return ret;
>  
> - unlock:
> +put_unlock:
> +	put_unlocked_mapping_entry(mapping, index, entry2);
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.6.6
> 

--
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:[~2016-06-24 21:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-21 15:45 [PATCH 0/3 v1] dax: Clear dirty bits after flushing caches Jan Kara
2016-06-21 15:45 ` Jan Kara
2016-06-21 15:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] dax: Make cache flushing protected by entry lock Jan Kara
2016-06-21 15:45   ` Jan Kara
2016-06-24 21:44   ` Ross Zwisler [this message]
2016-06-24 21:44     ` Ross Zwisler
2016-06-29 20:28     ` Jan Kara
2016-06-29 20:28       ` Jan Kara
2016-06-21 15:45 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm: Export follow_pte() Jan Kara
2016-06-21 15:45   ` Jan Kara
2016-06-24 21:55   ` Ross Zwisler
2016-06-24 21:55     ` Ross Zwisler
2016-06-29 20:29     ` Jan Kara
2016-06-29 20:29       ` Jan Kara
2016-06-21 15:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] dax: Clear dirty entry tags on cache flush Jan Kara
2016-06-21 15:45   ` Jan Kara
2016-06-21 17:31   ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-21 17:31     ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-21 17:31     ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-21 20:59   ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-21 20:59     ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-21 20:59     ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-23 10:47   ` Jan Kara
2016-06-23 10:47     ` Jan Kara
2016-06-23 10:47     ` Jan Kara
2016-06-28 21:38   ` Ross Zwisler
2016-06-28 21:38     ` Ross Zwisler
2016-06-29 20:47     ` Jan Kara
2016-06-29 20:47       ` Jan Kara
2016-06-28 21:41 ` [PATCH 0/3 v1] dax: Clear dirty bits after flushing caches Ross Zwisler
2016-06-28 21:41   ` Ross Zwisler

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=20160624214445.GA20730@linux.intel.com \
    --to=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    /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.