From: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: "Holger Hoffstätte" <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
"Linux MM" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] xfs: avoid deadlock when trigger memory reclaim in ->writepages
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 23:08:21 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALOAHbBcpYbMBoN+edEa5wp1VCf4mcbR8+SQTjVjRGpx7_v43A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200615145331.GK25296@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 10:53 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon 15-06-20 16:25:52, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> > On 2020-06-15 13:56, Yafang Shao wrote:
> [...]
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> > > index b356118..1ccfbf2 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> > > @@ -573,9 +573,21 @@ static inline bool xfs_ioend_needs_workqueue(struct iomap_ioend *ioend)
> > > struct writeback_control *wbc)
> > > {
> > > struct xfs_writepage_ctx wpc = { };
> > > + unsigned int nofs_flag;
> > > + int ret;
> > > xfs_iflags_clear(XFS_I(mapping->host), XFS_ITRUNCATED);
> > > - return iomap_writepages(mapping, wbc, &wpc.ctx, &xfs_writeback_ops);
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * We can allocate memory here while doing writeback on behalf of
> > > + * memory reclaim. To avoid memory allocation deadlocks set the
> > > + * task-wide nofs context for the following operations.
> > > + */
> > > + nofs_flag = memalloc_nofs_save();
> > > + ret = iomap_writepages(mapping, wbc, &wpc.ctx, &xfs_writeback_ops);
> > > + memalloc_nofs_restore(nofs_flag);
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > }
> > > STATIC int
> > >
> >
> > Not sure if I did something wrong, but while the previous version of this patch
> > worked fine, this one gave me (with v2 removed obviously):
> >
> > [ +0.000004] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2811 at fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:1544 iomap_do_writepage+0x6b4/0x780
>
> This corresponds to
> /*
> * Given that we do not allow direct reclaim to call us, we should
> * never be called in a recursive filesystem reclaim context.
> */
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS))
> goto redirty;
>
> which effectivelly says that memalloc_nofs_save/restore cannot be used
> for that code path.
Hi Michal,
My understanding is that this warning is to tell us we don't want a
recursive filesystem reclaim with PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS being specifically
set, but unfortunately PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS doesn't work so it comes here
again.
IOW, PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS can be set after this check, like what I did in v2. [1]
> Your stack trace doesn't point to a reclaim path
> which shows that this path is shared and also underlines that this is
> not really an intended use of the api. Please refer to
> Documentation/core-api/gfp_mask-from-fs-io.rst for more details but
> shortly the API should be used at the layer which defines a context
> which shouldn't allow to recurse. E.g. a lock which would be problematic
> in the reclaim recursion path.
Thanks for your information.
As pointed out by Dave in v1[2] that iomap_do_writepage() can be
called with a locked page
cache page and calls ->map_blocks from that context.
[1]. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/1591254347-15912-1-git-send-email-laoar.shao@gmail.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20200603222741.GQ2040@dread.disaster.area/
--
Thanks
Yafang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-15 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-15 11:56 [PATCH v3] xfs: avoid deadlock when trigger memory reclaim in ->writepages Yafang Shao
2020-06-15 14:25 ` Holger Hoffstätte
2020-06-15 14:51 ` Yafang Shao
2020-06-15 14:53 ` Michal Hocko
2020-06-15 15:07 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-06-15 23:23 ` Dave Chinner
2020-06-15 15:08 ` Yafang Shao [this message]
2020-06-15 23:06 ` Dave Chinner
2020-06-16 7:56 ` Michal Hocko
2020-06-16 10:17 ` Yafang Shao
2020-06-16 8:16 ` Michal Hocko
2020-06-16 9:05 ` Yafang Shao
2020-06-16 9:27 ` Michal Hocko
2020-06-16 9:39 ` Yafang Shao
2020-06-16 10:48 ` Michal Hocko
2020-06-16 11:42 ` Yafang Shao
2020-06-18 0:34 ` Dave Chinner
2020-06-18 11:04 ` Yafang Shao
2020-06-22 1:23 ` [xfs] 59d77e81c5: WARNING:at_fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:#iomap_do_writepage kernel test robot
2020-06-22 12:20 ` Yafang Shao
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=CALOAHbBcpYbMBoN+edEa5wp1VCf4mcbR8+SQTjVjRGpx7_v43A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--cc=holger@applied-asynchrony.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
/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).