From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-wbt: Avoid lock contention and thundering herd issue in wbt_wait To: Anchal Agarwal Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fllinden@amazon.com, sblbir@amazon.com, msw@amazon.com References: <20180731213410.GA35291@kaos-source-ops-60001.pdx1.amazon.com> <20180801170603.GA32864@kaos-source-ops-60001.pdx1.amazon.com> <9265896d-3f02-ff2f-8e02-3aca775f4087@kernel.dk> <20180807201247.GA21108@kaos-source-ops-60001.pdx1.amazon.com> <6f24ff4b-9373-2708-8342-96f190f17cbf@kernel.dk> <20180807211216.GA14371@kaos-source-ops-60001.pdx1.amazon.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <6bab69c9-b787-b12f-7738-72e05bf74444@kernel.dk> Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 15:19:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180807211216.GA14371@kaos-source-ops-60001.pdx1.amazon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-ID: On 8/7/18 3:12 PM, Anchal Agarwal wrote: > On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 02:39:48PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 8/7/18 2:12 PM, Anchal Agarwal wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 08:29:44AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 8/1/18 4:09 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On 8/1/18 11:06 AM, Anchal Agarwal wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 09:14:50AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/31/18 3:34 PM, Anchal Agarwal wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi folks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This patch modifies commit e34cbd307477a >>>>>>>> (blk-wbt: add general throttling mechanism) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am currently running a large bare metal instance (i3.metal) >>>>>>>> on EC2 with 72 cores, 512GB of RAM and NVME drives, with a >>>>>>>> 4.18 kernel. I have a workload that simulates a database >>>>>>>> workload and I am running into lockup issues when writeback >>>>>>>> throttling is enabled,with the hung task detector also >>>>>>>> kicking in. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Crash dumps show that most CPUs (up to 50 of them) are >>>>>>>> all trying to get the wbt wait queue lock while trying to add >>>>>>>> themselves to it in __wbt_wait (see stack traces below). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [ 0.948118] CPU: 45 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/45 Not tainted 4.14.51-62.38.amzn1.x86_64 #1 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948119] Hardware name: Amazon EC2 i3.metal/Not Specified, BIOS 1.0 10/16/2017 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948120] task: ffff883f7878c000 task.stack: ffffc9000c69c000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948124] RIP: 0010:native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0xf8/0x1a0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948125] RSP: 0018:ffff883f7fcc3dc8 EFLAGS: 00000046 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948126] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff887f7709ca68 RCX: ffff883f7fce2a00 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948128] RDX: 000000000000001c RSI: 0000000000740001 RDI: ffff887f7709ca68 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948129] RBP: 0000000000000002 R08: 0000000000b80000 R09: 0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948130] R10: ffff883f7fcc3d78 R11: 000000000de27121 R12: 0000000000000002 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948131] R13: 0000000000000003 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948132] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff883f7fcc0000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948134] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948135] CR2: 000000c424c77000 CR3: 0000000002010005 CR4: 00000000003606e0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948136] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948137] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948138] Call Trace: >>>>>>>> [ 0.948139] >>>>>>>> [ 0.948142] do_raw_spin_lock+0xad/0xc0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948145] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x4b >>>>>>>> [ 0.948149] ? __wake_up_common_lock+0x53/0x90 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948150] __wake_up_common_lock+0x53/0x90 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948155] wbt_done+0x7b/0xa0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948158] blk_mq_free_request+0xb7/0x110 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948161] __blk_mq_complete_request+0xcb/0x140 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948166] nvme_process_cq+0xce/0x1a0 [nvme] >>>>>>>> [ 0.948169] nvme_irq+0x23/0x50 [nvme] >>>>>>>> [ 0.948173] __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x46/0x300 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948176] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x20/0x50 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948179] handle_irq_event+0x34/0x60 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948181] handle_edge_irq+0x77/0x190 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948185] handle_irq+0xaf/0x120 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948188] do_IRQ+0x53/0x110 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948191] common_interrupt+0x87/0x87 >>>>>>>> [ 0.948192] >>>>>>>> .... >>>>>>>> [ 0.311136] CPU: 4 PID: 9737 Comm: run_linux_amd64 Not tainted 4.14.51-62.38.amzn1.x86_64 #1 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311137] Hardware name: Amazon EC2 i3.metal/Not Specified, BIOS 1.0 10/16/2017 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311138] task: ffff883f6e6a8000 task.stack: ffffc9000f1ec000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311141] RIP: 0010:native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0xf5/0x1a0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311142] RSP: 0018:ffffc9000f1efa28 EFLAGS: 00000046 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311144] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff887f7709ca68 RCX: ffff883f7f722a00 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311145] RDX: 0000000000000035 RSI: 0000000000d80001 RDI: ffff887f7709ca68 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311146] RBP: 0000000000000202 R08: 0000000000140000 R09: 0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311147] R10: ffffc9000f1ef9d8 R11: 000000001a249fa0 R12: ffff887f7709ca68 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311148] R13: ffffc9000f1efad0 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff887f7709ca00 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311149] FS: 000000c423f30090(0000) GS:ffff883f7f700000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311150] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311151] CR2: 00007feefcea4000 CR3: 0000007f7016e001 CR4: 00000000003606e0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311152] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311153] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311154] Call Trace: >>>>>>>> [ 0.311157] do_raw_spin_lock+0xad/0xc0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311160] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x4b >>>>>>>> [ 0.311162] ? prepare_to_wait_exclusive+0x28/0xb0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311164] prepare_to_wait_exclusive+0x28/0xb0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311167] wbt_wait+0x127/0x330 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311169] ? finish_wait+0x80/0x80 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311172] ? generic_make_request+0xda/0x3b0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311174] blk_mq_make_request+0xd6/0x7b0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311176] ? blk_queue_enter+0x24/0x260 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311178] ? generic_make_request+0xda/0x3b0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311181] generic_make_request+0x10c/0x3b0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311183] ? submit_bio+0x5c/0x110 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311185] submit_bio+0x5c/0x110 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311197] ? __ext4_journal_stop+0x36/0xa0 [ext4] >>>>>>>> [ 0.311210] ext4_io_submit+0x48/0x60 [ext4] >>>>>>>> [ 0.311222] ext4_writepages+0x810/0x11f0 [ext4] >>>>>>>> [ 0.311229] ? do_writepages+0x3c/0xd0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311239] ? ext4_mark_inode_dirty+0x260/0x260 [ext4] >>>>>>>> [ 0.311240] do_writepages+0x3c/0xd0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311243] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x24/0x30 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311245] ? wbc_attach_and_unlock_inode+0x165/0x280 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311248] ? __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0xa3/0xe0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311250] __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0xa3/0xe0 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311253] file_write_and_wait_range+0x34/0x90 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311264] ext4_sync_file+0x151/0x500 [ext4] >>>>>>>> [ 0.311267] do_fsync+0x38/0x60 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311270] SyS_fsync+0xc/0x10 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311272] do_syscall_64+0x6f/0x170 >>>>>>>> [ 0.311274] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x42/0xb7 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the original patch, wbt_done is waking up all the exclusive >>>>>>>> processes in the wait queue, which can cause a thundering herd >>>>>>>> if there is a large number of writer threads in the queue. The >>>>>>>> original intention of the code seems to be to wake up one thread >>>>>>>> only however, it uses wake_up_all() in __wbt_done(), and then >>>>>>>> uses the following check in __wbt_wait to have only one thread >>>>>>>> actually get out of the wait loop: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> if (waitqueue_active(&rqw->wait) && >>>>>>>> rqw->wait.head.next != &wait->entry) >>>>>>>> return false; >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The problem with this is that the wait entry in wbt_wait is >>>>>>>> define with DEFINE_WAIT, which uses the autoremove wakeup function. >>>>>>>> That means that the above check is invalid - the wait entry will >>>>>>>> have been removed from the queue already by the time we hit the >>>>>>>> check in the loop. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Secondly, auto-removing the wait entries also means that the wait >>>>>>>> queue essentially gets reordered "randomly" (e.g. threads re-add >>>>>>>> themselves in the order they got to run after being woken up). >>>>>>>> Additionally, new requests entering wbt_wait might overtake requests >>>>>>>> that were queued earlier, because the wait queue will be >>>>>>>> (temporarily) empty after the wake_up_all, so the waitqueue_active >>>>>>>> check will not stop them. This can cause certain threads to starve >>>>>>>> under high load. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The fix is to leave the woken up requests in the queue and remove >>>>>>>> them in finish_wait() once the current thread breaks out of the >>>>>>>> wait loop in __wbt_wait. This will ensure new requests always >>>>>>>> end up at the back of the queue, and they won't overtake requests >>>>>>>> that are already in the wait queue. With that change, the loop >>>>>>>> in wbt_wait is also in line with many other wait loops in the kernel. >>>>>>>> Waking up just one thread drastically reduces lock contention, as >>>>>>>> does moving the wait queue add/remove out of the loop. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A significant drop in lockdep's lock contention numbers is seen when >>>>>>>> running the test application on the patched kernel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I like the patch, and a few weeks ago we independently discovered that >>>>>>> the waitqueue list checking was bogus as well. My only worry is that >>>>>>> changes like this can be delicate, meaning that it's easy to introduce >>>>>>> stall conditions. What kind of testing did you push this through? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Jens Axboe >>>>>>> >>>>>> I ran the following tests on both real HW with NVME devices attached >>>>>> and emulated NVME too: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. The test case I used to reproduce the issue, spawns a bunch of threads >>>>>> to concurrently read and write files with random size and content. >>>>>> Files are randomly fsync'd. The implementation is a FIFO queue of files. >>>>>> When the queue fills the test starts to verify and remove the files. This >>>>>> test will fail if there's a read, write, or hash check failure. It tests >>>>>> for file corruption when lots of small files are being read and written >>>>>> with high concurrency. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. Fio for random writes with a root NVME device of 200GB >>>>>> >>>>>> fio --name=randwrite --ioengine=libaio --iodepth=1 --rw=randwrite --bs=4k >>>>>> --direct=0 --size=10G --numjobs=2 --runtime=60 --group_reporting >>>>>> >>>>>> fio --name=randwrite --ioengine=libaio --iodepth=1 --rw=randwrite --bs=4k >>>>>> --direct=0 --size=5G --numjobs=2 --runtime=30 --fsync=64 --group_reporting >>>>>> >>>>>> I did see an improvement in the bandwidth numbers reported on the patched >>>>>> kernel. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you have any test case/suite in mind that you would suggest me to >>>>>> run to be sure that patch does not introduce any stall conditions? >>>>> >>>>> One thing that is always useful is to run xfstest, do a full run on >>>>> the device. If that works, then do another full run, this time limiting >>>>> the queue depth of the SCSI device to 1. If both of those pass, then >>>>> I'd feel pretty good getting this applied for 4.19. >>>> >>>> Did you get a chance to run this full test? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jens Axboe >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Hi Jens, >>> Yes I did run the tests and was in the process of compiling concrete results >>> I tested following environments against xfs/auto group >>> 1. Vanilla 4.18.rc kernel >>> 2. 4.18 kernel with the blk-wbt patch >>> 3. 4.18 kernel with the blk-wbt patch + io_queue_depth=2. I >>> understand you asked for queue depth for SCSI device=1 however, I have NVME >>> devices in my environment and 2 is the minimum value for io_queue_depth allowed >>> according to the NVME driver code. The results pretty much look same with no >>> stalls or exceptional failures. >>> xfs/auto ran 296 odd tests with 3 failures and 130 something "no runs". >>> Remaining tests passed. "Skipped tests" were mostly due to missing features >>> (eg: reflink support on scratch filesystem) >>> The failures were consistent across runs on 3 different environments. >>> I am also running full test suite but it is taking long time as I am >>> hitting kernel BUG in xfs code in some generic tests. This BUG is not >>> related to the patch and I see them in vanilla kernel too. I am in >>> the process of excluding these kind of tests as they come and >>> re-run the suite however, this proces is time taking. >>> Do you have any specific tests in mind that you would like me >>> to run apart from what I have already tested above? >> >> Thanks, I think that looks good. I'll get your patch applied for >> 4.19. >> >> -- >> Jens Axboe >> >> > > Hi Jens, > Thanks for accepting this. There is one small issue, I don't find any emails > send by me on the lkml mailing list. I am not sure why it didn't land there, > all I can see is your responses. Do you want one of us to resend the patch > or will you be able to do it? That's odd, are you getting rejections on your emails? For reference, the patch is here: http://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=for-4.19/block&id=2887e41b910bb14fd847cf01ab7a5993db989d88 -- Jens Axboe