From: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
<yukuai3@huawei.com>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: ensure the memory order between bi_private and bi_status
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 09:14:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <da5a7284-89f2-31c2-80d9-d8c6348be26a@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0fde8c5a-2c1d-4439-7c75-71fa120d3b62@huawei.com>
ping ?
On 7/7/2021 2:29 PM, Hou Tao wrote:
> ping ?
>
> On 7/1/2021 7:35 PM, Hou Tao wrote:
>> When running stress test on null_blk under linux-4.19.y, the following
>> warning is reported:
>>
>> percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu: percpu ref (css_release) <= 0 (-3) after switching to atomic
>>
>> The cause is that css_put() is invoked twice on the same bio as shown below:
>>
>> CPU 1: CPU 2:
>>
>> // IO completion kworker // IO submit thread
>> __blkdev_direct_IO_simple
>> submit_bio
>>
>> bio_endio
>> bio_uninit(bio)
>> css_put(bi_css)
>> bi_css = NULL
>> set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
>> bio->bi_end_io
>> blkdev_bio_end_io_simple
>> bio->bi_private = NULL
>> // bi_private is NULL
>> READ_ONCE(bio->bi_private)
>> wake_up_process
>> smp_mb__after_spinlock
>>
>> bio_unint(bio)
>> // read bi_css as no-NULL
>> // so call css_put() again
>> css_put(bi_css)
>>
>> Because there is no memory barriers between the reading and the writing of
>> bi_private and bi_css, so reading bi_private as NULL can not guarantee
>> bi_css will also be NULL on weak-memory model host (e.g, ARM64).
>>
>> For the latest kernel source, css_put() has been removed from bio_unint(),
>> but the memory-order problem still exists, because the order between
>> bio->bi_private and {bi_status|bi_blkg} is also assumed in
>> __blkdev_direct_IO_simple(). It is reproducible that
>> __blkdev_direct_IO_simple() may read bi_status as 0 event if
>> bi_status is set as an errno in req_bio_endio().
>>
>> In __blkdev_direct_IO(), the memory order between dio->waiter and
>> dio->bio.bi_status is not guaranteed neither. Until now it is unable to
>> reproduce it, maybe because dio->waiter and dio->bio.bi_status are
>> in the same cache-line. But it is better to add guarantee for memory
>> order.
>>
>> Fixing it by using smp_load_acquire() & smp_store_release() to guarantee
>> the order between {bio->bi_private|dio->waiter} and {bi_status|bi_blkg}.
>>
>> Fixes: 189ce2b9dcc3 ("block: fast-path for small and simple direct I/O requests")
>> Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> fs/block_dev.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/block_dev.c b/fs/block_dev.c
>> index eb34f5c357cf..a602c6315b0b 100644
>> --- a/fs/block_dev.c
>> +++ b/fs/block_dev.c
>> @@ -224,7 +224,11 @@ static void blkdev_bio_end_io_simple(struct bio *bio)
>> {
>> struct task_struct *waiter = bio->bi_private;
>>
>> - WRITE_ONCE(bio->bi_private, NULL);
>> + /*
>> + * Paired with smp_load_acquire in __blkdev_direct_IO_simple()
>> + * to ensure the order between bi_private and bi_xxx
>> + */
>> + smp_store_release(&bio->bi_private, NULL);
>> blk_wake_io_task(waiter);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -283,7 +287,8 @@ __blkdev_direct_IO_simple(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
>> qc = submit_bio(&bio);
>> for (;;) {
>> set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
>> - if (!READ_ONCE(bio.bi_private))
>> + /* Refer to comments in blkdev_bio_end_io_simple() */
>> + if (!smp_load_acquire(&bio.bi_private))
>> break;
>> if (!(iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_HIPRI) ||
>> !blk_poll(bdev_get_queue(bdev), qc, true))
>> @@ -353,7 +358,12 @@ static void blkdev_bio_end_io(struct bio *bio)
>> } else {
>> struct task_struct *waiter = dio->waiter;
>>
>> - WRITE_ONCE(dio->waiter, NULL);
>> + /*
>> + * Paired with smp_load_acquire() in
>> + * __blkdev_direct_IO() to ensure the order between
>> + * dio->waiter and bio->bi_xxx
>> + */
>> + smp_store_release(&dio->waiter, NULL);
>> blk_wake_io_task(waiter);
>> }
>> }
>> @@ -478,7 +488,8 @@ static ssize_t __blkdev_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
>>
>> for (;;) {
>> set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
>> - if (!READ_ONCE(dio->waiter))
>> + /* Refer to comments in blkdev_bio_end_io */
>> + if (!smp_load_acquire(&dio->waiter))
>> break;
>>
>> if (!(iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_HIPRI) ||
> .
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-13 1:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-01 11:35 [PATCH] block: ensure the memory order between bi_private and bi_status Hou Tao
2021-07-07 6:29 ` Hou Tao
2021-07-13 1:14 ` Hou Tao [this message]
2021-07-15 7:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-07-15 8:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-07-16 9:02 ` Hou Tao
2021-07-16 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-07-19 18:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-19 18:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=da5a7284-89f2-31c2-80d9-d8c6348be26a@huawei.com \
--to=houtao1@huawei.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.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).