linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, hare@suse.de, mkoutny@suse.com,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bcache: ignore pending signals in bcache_device_init()
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 13:27:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200302122748.GH4380@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200302093450.48016-2-colyli@suse.de>

[Cc Oleg]

On Mon 02-03-20 17:34:49, Coly Li wrote:
> When cache device and cached device are registered simuteneously and
> register_cache() firstly acquires bch_register_lock. register_bdev()
> has to wait before register_cache() finished, it might be a very long
> time.
> 
> If the registration is from udev rules in system boot up time, and
> registration is not completed before udev timeout (default 180s), the
> registration process will be killed by udevd. Then the following calls
> to kthread_run() or kthread_create() will fail due to the pending
> signal (they are implemented this way at this moment).
> 
> For boot time, this is not good, because it means a cache device with
> huge cached data will always fail in boot time, just because it
> spends too much time to check its internal meta data (btree and dirty
> sectors).
> 
> The failure for cache device registration is solved by previous
> patches, but failure due to timeout also exists in cached device
> registration. As the above text explains, cached device registration
> may also be timeout if it is blocked by a timeout cache device
> registration process. Then in the following code path,
>     bioset_init() <= bcache_device_init() <= cached_dev_init() <=
>     register_bdev() <= register_bcache()
> bioset_init() will fail because internally kthread_create() will fail
> for pending signal in the following code path,
>     bioset_init() => alloc_workqueue() => init_rescuer() =>
>     kthread_create()
> 
> Maybe fix kthread_create() and kthread_run() is better method, but at
> this moment a fast workaroudn is to flush pending signals before
> calling bioset_init() in bcache_device_init().

I cannot really comment on the bcache part because I am not familiar
with the code. It is quite surprising to see an initialization taking
that long though.

Anyway

> This patch calls flush_signals() in bcache_device_init() if there is
> pending signal for current process. It avoids bcache registration
> failure in system boot up time due to bcache udev rule timeout.

this sounds like a wrong way to address the issue. Killing the udev
worker is a userspace policy and the kernel shouldn't simply ignore it.
Is there any problem to simply increase the timeout on the system which
uses a large bcache?

Btw. Oleg, I have noticed quite a lot of flush_signals usage in the
drivers land and I have really hard time to understand their purpose.
What is the actual valid usage of this function? Should we somehow
document it?

> Signed-off-by: Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
> ---
>  drivers/md/bcache/super.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
> index 0c3c5419c52b..e8bbd4f171ca 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
> @@ -850,6 +850,18 @@ static int bcache_device_init(struct bcache_device *d, unsigned int block_size,
>  	if (idx < 0)
>  		return idx;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * There is a timeout in udevd, if the bcache device is registering
> +	 * by udev rules, and not completed in time, the udevd may kill the
> +	 * registration process. In this condition, there will be pending
> +	 * signal here and cause bioset_init() failed for internally creating
> +	 * its kthread. Here the registration should ignore the timeout and
> +	 * continue, it is safe to ignore the pending signal and avoid to
> +	 * fail bcache registration in boot up time.
> +	 */
> +	if (signal_pending(current))
> +		flush_signals(current);
> +
>  	if (bioset_init(&d->bio_split, 4, offsetof(struct bbio, bio),
>  			BIOSET_NEED_BVECS|BIOSET_NEED_RESCUER))
>  		goto err;
> -- 
> 2.16.4

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-02 12:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-02  9:34 [PATCH 0/2] bcache patches for Linux v5.6-rc5 Coly Li
2020-03-02  9:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] bcache: ignore pending signals in bcache_device_init() Coly Li
2020-03-02 12:27   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-03-02 13:29     ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 13:40       ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-02 17:06         ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 17:28           ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-02 17:47             ` Coly Li
2020-03-03  1:22               ` Guoqing Jiang
2020-03-03  1:30                 ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 13:49     ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-02 17:16       ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 17:19         ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-02 17:32           ` Coly Li
2020-03-02 20:33             ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-03  1:08               ` Coly Li
2020-03-03  7:22             ` Hannes Reinecke
2020-03-03  8:05       ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-03 12:19         ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-03 16:03           ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 11:36             ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 11:53               ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 18:42                 ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-04 11:57               ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 12:13                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 12:22                   ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 12:33                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 12:41                       ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-04 13:02                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-03-04 13:21                           ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-02 15:01     ` Jens Axboe
2020-03-02  9:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] bcache: fix code comments for ignore pending signals Coly Li

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=20200302122748.GH4380@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=colyli@suse.de \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).