From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FCAFC433B4 for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 13:44:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF12613BA for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 13:44:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233035AbhEENpP (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2021 09:45:15 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56116 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231769AbhEENpO (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2021 09:45:14 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x333.google.com (mail-wm1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::333]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 300A3C061574 for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 06:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x333.google.com with SMTP id t11-20020a05600c198bb02901476e13296aso1181874wmq.0 for ; Wed, 05 May 2021 06:44:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=vGo0uaSeiqRbiJJntV4YHGdCi4Vglm15Og8RJv5hdxw=; b=lsT4c7fW2seoHEFcWqi/EUlaK275+SUmcNtHI0rmOwZRAKk9Ye4JeWKvH5JfLO1njt QEclKu7HioMy1tz34u9sRkmJq+AG4C64Y5G/RsUPGKRlgOQkiVQehMZdaOrVfh7hvKdG cjkzAHUc5JwPhsEN9K6xr8TwckkR9XBVV27oIgT3F8lRt0OQNvWl59ZIgSKINcNMElxH 3UJ3qAZhGCmc3G//TmihejZd+U41Q3tlS7nsOMh0ZML3SC/3l3axwfHYGGHNXIaJ9Hw1 OdExjplypD/AQyL3bE9YPKVL4EzYVuvpyS3nZ9bAKeiNhoxiWyBMYjXzJ3p10RwwK2+2 E0qA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=vGo0uaSeiqRbiJJntV4YHGdCi4Vglm15Og8RJv5hdxw=; b=AhA+6kRnVpb8DL/nAcQcRDo2VFJpcCtD4NxeldliWSnrwg9GzehVXWUs9W3p9YnEJM L+r2M2j9YqN23GSkia6oaawlucvF5GHA2r5WeMW/Ky2l6b8FLNeICX9dTjRQ3Hic7c2r CPN0K1+fydazoi7vS4SvhkT4JBqTVdpJI9E59j0bRsu9/lQHoHGipNbXDOyqCSWzCsCz ISnd/clQA/8JqEoF+XkTC3YSQbwWAiAtZnCXT7J36cHx+fLzGJ7nDRDlS0U1BY+iVF9E dBsgHIaoZ1th2sGVjd5nlTr8VVcq4mn8MPJXoiQNQNly7IqHkc8mRYmSNc8wxU3uFBj0 Ma3g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533PH60AF786psuOU46aL5UB8g8vtt7yl7qdD2GXz7gDRt9h/0hC 8jsobwVgRSJTyqtt0Kz7Egl+Jg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyho5v4PcTDt2yquNRz4vDJr02BBkkodow6e4p+jtNKl8kVY8kr+HIhXSwGVtuGl+rfgIEC1w== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f705:: with SMTP id v5mr8280704wmh.69.1620222255832; Wed, 05 May 2021 06:44:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.228.233] ([37.163.176.75]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f4sm20206274wrz.33.2021.05.05.06.44.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 May 2021 06:44:14 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] bfq: silence lockdep for bfqd/ioc lock inversion From: Paolo Valente In-Reply-To: <20210415104722.GB25217@quack2.suse.cz> Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 15:35:55 +0200 Cc: Khazhy Kumykov , Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5E86EBD7-9996-4429-8531-3BBED535FE33@linaro.org> References: <20210319060015.3979352-1-khazhy@google.com> <20210414095455.GA29760@quack2.suse.cz> <20210415104722.GB25217@quack2.suse.cz> To: Jan Kara X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org Hi Jan, Khazhy, sorry for my super delay. Thanks Khazy for spotting this, and Jan for proposing alternative solutions. > Il giorno 15 apr 2021, alle ore 12:47, Jan Kara ha = scritto: >=20 > On Wed 14-04-21 11:33:14, Khazhy Kumykov wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:54 AM Jan Kara wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Thu 18-03-21 23:00:15, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote: >>>> lockdep warns of circular locking due to inversion between >>>> bfq_insert_requests and bfq_exit_icq. If we end freeing a request = when >>>> merging, we *may* grab an ioc->lock if that request is the last = refcount >>>> to that ioc. bfq_bio_merge also potentially could have this = ordering. >>>> bfq_exit_icq, conversely, grabs bfqd but is always called with = ioc->lock >>>> held. >>>>=20 >>>> bfq_exit_icq may either be called from put_io_context_active with = ioc >>>> refcount raised, ioc_release_fn after the last refcount was already >>>> dropped, or ioc_clear_queue, which is only called while queue is >>>> quiesced or exiting, so the inverted orderings should never = conflict. >>>>=20 >>>> Fixes: aee69d78dec0 ("block, bfq: introduce the BFQ-v0 I/O = scheduler as >>>> an extra scheduler") >>>>=20 >>>> Signed-off-by: Khazhismel Kumykov >>>=20 >>> I've just hit the same lockdep complaint. When looking at this = another >>> option to solve this complaint seemed to be to modify = bfq_bio_merge() like: >>>=20 >>> ret =3D blk_mq_sched_try_merge(q, bio, nr_segs, &free); >>>=20 >>> + spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock); >>> if (free) >>> blk_mq_free_request(free); >>> - spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock); >>>=20 >>> return ret; >>>=20 >>> to release request outside of bfqd->lock. Because AFAICT there's no = good >>> reason why we are actually freeing the request under bfqd->lock. And = it >>> would seem a bit safer than annotating-away the lockdep complaint = (as much >>> as I don't see a problem with your analysis). Paolo? >>=20 >> If we can re-order the locking so we don't need the annotation, that >> seems better ("inversion is OK so long as either we're frozen or we >> have ioc refcount, and we only grab ioc->lock normally if we drop the >> last refcount" is a tad "clever"). Though we still need to deal with >> blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge which can potentially free a request. >=20 > I see, right. >=20 Trying to put pieces together: 1) Moving ahead the invocation of spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock) in bfq_bio_merge(), as suggested by Jan, seems ok to me as well. I also proposed this change several years ago, but received no feedback. So I followed the conservative approach of not touching what apparently works :) 2) If I'm not missing anything, then also what Jan suggests below is ok. That is, in blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge, ioc->lock gets grabbed only in case blk_mq_free_request is invoked. So it is ok to simply move the invocation of blk_mq_free_request outside blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge, using the same approach as with blk_mq_sched_try_merge in bfq_bio_merge. Thanks, Paolo >> (See the first stacktrace). Something simple that I wasn't sure of = is: >> could we delay bfq_exit_icq work, then avoid the inversion? Simpler = to >> analyze then. >=20 > That's problematic because ICQ (referencing BFQQs etc.) is going to be > freed after RCU grace period expires. So we cannot really postpone the > teardown of bfq_io_cq. What we could do is to modify > blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge() so that it returns request to free > similarly to blk_mq_sched_try_merge(). Then we can free the request = after > dropping bfqd->lock. >=20 > Honza >=20 >>>> --- >>>> block/bfq-iosched.c | 9 ++++++++- >>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>=20 >>>> Noticed this lockdep running xfstests (generic/464) on top of a bfq >>>> block device. I was also able to tease it out w/ binary trying to = issue >>>> requests that would end up merging while rapidly swapping the = active >>>> scheduler. As far as I could see, the deadlock would not actually = occur, >>>> so this patch opts to change lock class for the inverted case. >>>>=20 >>>> bfqd -> ioc : >>>> [ 2995.524557] __lock_acquire+0x18f5/0x2660 >>>> [ 2995.524562] lock_acquire+0xb4/0x3a0 >>>> [ 2995.524565] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3f/0x60 >>>> [ 2995.524569] put_io_context+0x33/0x90. -> ioc->lock grabbed >>>> [ 2995.524573] blk_mq_free_request+0x51/0x140 >>>> [ 2995.524577] blk_put_request+0xe/0x10 >>>> [ 2995.524580] blk_attempt_req_merge+0x1d/0x30 >>>> [ 2995.524585] elv_attempt_insert_merge+0x56/0xa0 >>>> [ 2995.524590] blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge+0x4b/0x60 >>>> [ 2995.524595] bfq_insert_requests+0x9e/0x18c0. -> bfqd->lock = grabbed >>>> [ 2995.524598] blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0xd6/0x2b0 >>>> [ 2995.524602] blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x154/0x280 >>>> [ 2995.524606] blk_finish_plug+0x40/0x60 >>>> [ 2995.524609] ext4_writepages+0x696/0x1320 >>>> [ 2995.524614] do_writepages+0x1c/0x80 >>>> [ 2995.524621] __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0xd7/0x120 >>>> [ 2995.524625] sync_file_range+0xac/0xf0 >>>> [ 2995.524642] __x64_sys_sync_file_range+0x44/0x70 >>>> [ 2995.524646] do_syscall_64+0x31/0x40 >>>> [ 2995.524649] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae >>>>=20 >>>> ioc -> bfqd >>>> [ 2995.524490] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3f/0x60 >>>> [ 2995.524498] bfq_exit_icq+0xa3/0xe0 -> bfqd->lock grabbed >>>> [ 2995.524512] put_io_context_active+0x78/0xb0 -> ioc->lock grabbed >>>> [ 2995.524516] exit_io_context+0x48/0x50 >>>> [ 2995.524519] do_exit+0x7e9/0xdd0 >>>> [ 2995.524526] do_group_exit+0x54/0xc0 >>>> [ 2995.524530] __x64_sys_exit_group+0x18/0x20 >>>> [ 2995.524534] do_syscall_64+0x31/0x40 >>>> [ 2995.524537] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae >>>>=20 >>>> Another trace where we grab ioc -> bfqd through bfq_exit_icq is = when >>>> changing elevator >>>> -> #1 (&(&bfqd->lock)->rlock){-.-.}: >>>> [ 646.890820] lock_acquire+0x9b/0x140 >>>> [ 646.894868] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3b/0x50 >>>> [ 646.899707] bfq_exit_icq_bfqq+0x47/0x1f0 >>>> [ 646.904196] bfq_exit_icq+0x21/0x30 >>>> [ 646.908160] ioc_destroy_icq+0xf3/0x130 >>>> [ 646.912466] ioc_clear_queue+0xb8/0x140 >>>> [ 646.916771] elevator_switch_mq+0xa4/0x3c0 >>>> [ 646.921333] elevator_switch+0x5f/0x340 >>>>=20 >>>> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c >>>> index 95586137194e..cb50ac0ffe80 100644 >>>> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c >>>> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c >>>> @@ -5027,7 +5027,14 @@ static void bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(struct = bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync) >>>> if (bfqq && bfqd) { >>>> unsigned long flags; >>>>=20 >>>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&bfqd->lock, flags); >>>> + /* bfq_exit_icq is usually called with ioc->lock = held, which is >>>> + * inverse order from elsewhere, which may grab = ioc->lock >>>> + * under bfqd->lock if we merge requests and drop the = last ioc >>>> + * refcount. Since exit_icq is either called with a = refcount, >>>> + * or with queue quiesced, use a differnet lock class = to >>>> + * silence lockdep >>>> + */ >>>> + spin_lock_irqsave_nested(&bfqd->lock, flags, 1); >>>> bfqq->bic =3D NULL; >>>> bfq_exit_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq); >>>> bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, is_sync); >>>> -- >>>> 2.31.0.rc2.261.g7f71774620-goog >>>>=20 >>> -- >>> Jan Kara >>> SUSE Labs, CR >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Jan Kara > SUSE Labs, CR