From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932641AbdC2LRN (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:17:13 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36055 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755984AbdC2LQy (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:16:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:16:51 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Ilya Dryomov Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , stable@vger.kernel.org, Sergey Jerusalimov , Jeff Layton , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 48/76] libceph: force GFP_NOIO for socket allocations Message-ID: <20170329111650.GI27994@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170328122559.966310440@linuxfoundation.org> <20170328122601.905696872@linuxfoundation.org> <20170328124312.GE18241@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170328133040.GJ18241@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170329104126.GF27994@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170329105536.GH27994@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 29-03-17 13:10:01, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 29-03-17 12:41:26, Michal Hocko wrote: > > [...] > >> > ceph_con_workfn > >> > mutex_lock(&con->mutex) # ceph_connection::mutex > >> > try_write > >> > ceph_tcp_connect > >> > sock_create_kern > >> > GFP_KERNEL allocation > >> > allocator recurses into XFS, more I/O is issued > > > > One more note. So what happens if this is a GFP_NOIO request which > > cannot make any progress? Your IO thread is blocked on con->mutex > > as you write below but the above thread cannot proceed as well. So I am > > _really_ not sure this acutally helps. > > This is not the only I/O worker. A ceph cluster typically consists of > at least a few OSDs and can be as large as thousands of OSDs. This is > the reason we are calling sock_create_kern() on the writeback path in > the first place: pre-opening thousands of sockets isn't feasible. Sorry for being dense here but what actually guarantees the forward progress? My current understanding is that the deadlock is caused by con->mutext being held while the allocation cannot make a forward progress. I can imagine this would be possible if the other io flushers depend on this lock. But then NOIO vs. KERNEL allocation doesn't make much difference. What am I missing? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs