From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752107AbdC2OZW (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:25:22 -0400 Received: from mail-vk0-f67.google.com ([209.85.213.67]:33175 "EHLO mail-vk0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751194AbdC2OZU (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:25:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <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> <20170329111650.GI27994@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Ilya Dryomov Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:25:18 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 48/76] libceph: force GFP_NOIO for socket allocations To: Michal Hocko Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , stable@vger.kernel.org, Sergey Jerusalimov , Jeff Layton , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > 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? con->mutex is per-ceph_connection, osdc->request_mutex is global and is the real problem here because we need both on the submit side, at least in 3.18. You are correct that even with GFP_NOIO this code may lock up in theory, however I think it's very unlikely in practice. We got rid of osdc->request_mutex in 4.7, so these workers are almost independent in newer kernels and should be able to free up memory for those blocked on GFP_NOIO retries with their respective con->mutex held. Using GFP_KERNEL and thus allowing the recursion is just asking for an AA deadlock on con->mutex OTOH, so it does make a difference. I'm a little confused by this discussion because for me this patch was a no-brainer... Locking aside, you said it was the stack trace in the changelog that got your attention -- are you saying it's OK for a block device to recurse back into the filesystem when doing I/O, potentially generating more I/O? Thanks, Ilya