From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=XqdI=6B=lists.01.org=linux-nvdimm-bounces@kernel.org>
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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1
	autolearn=no 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 29B27C38A2B
	for <linux-nvdimm@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:05:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 042612078E
	for <linux-nvdimm@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:05:24 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 042612078E
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org
Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDB3100DCB9A;
	Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=115.124.30.43; helo=out30-43.freemail.mail.aliyun.com; envelope-from=bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com; receiver=<UNKNOWN> 
Received: from out30-43.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-43.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.43])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CAC3100DCB98
	for <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:05:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R191e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e04394;MF=bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=9;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0TvqiUma_1587146713;
Received: from rsjd01523.et2sqa(mailfrom:bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0TvqiUma_1587146713)
          by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1);
          Sat, 18 Apr 2020 02:05:19 +0800
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 02:05:13 +0800
From: Liu Bo <bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/20] fuse,virtiofs: Add logic to free up a memory range
Message-ID: <20200417180513.GA67026@rsjd01523.et2sqa>
References: <20200304165845.3081-1-vgoyal@redhat.com>
 <20200304165845.3081-21-vgoyal@redhat.com>
 <20200326000904.GA34937@rsjd01523.et2sqa>
 <20200327140114.GB32717@redhat.com>
 <20200327220606.GA119028@rsjd01523.et2sqa>
 <20200414193045.GB210453@redhat.com>
 <20200415172229.GA121484@rsjd01523.et2sqa>
 <20200416190507.GC276932@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200416190507.GC276932@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Message-ID-Hash: FOFK5BYVYISPJ6Y2RY3AUHQE24VRREKS
X-Message-ID-Hash: FOFK5BYVYISPJ6Y2RY3AUHQE24VRREKS
X-MailFrom: bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation
CC: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, virtio-fs@redhat.com, miklos@szeredi.hu, stefanha@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, mst@redhat.com
X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com
List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." <linux-nvdimm.lists.01.org>
Archived-At: <https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org/message/FOFK5BYVYISPJ6Y2RY3AUHQE24VRREKS/>
List-Archive: <https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org/>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-join@lists.01.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 03:05:07PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 01:22:29AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:30:45PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 06:06:06AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 10:01:14AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 08:09:05AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > [..]
> > > > > > > +/*
> > > > > > > + * Find first mapping in the tree and free it and return it. Do not add
> > > > > > > + * it back to free pool. If fault == true, this function should be called
> > > > > > > + * with fi->i_mmap_sem held.
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > +static struct fuse_dax_mapping *inode_reclaim_one_dmap(struct fuse_conn *fc,
> > > > > > > +							 struct inode *inode,
> > > > > > > +							 bool fault)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > +	struct fuse_inode *fi = get_fuse_inode(inode);
> > > > > > > +	struct fuse_dax_mapping *dmap;
> > > > > > > +	int ret;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	if (!fault)
> > > > > > > +		down_write(&fi->i_mmap_sem);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	/*
> > > > > > > +	 * Make sure there are no references to inode pages using
> > > > > > > +	 * get_user_pages()
> > > > > > > +	 */
> > > > > > > +	ret = fuse_break_dax_layouts(inode, 0, 0);
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Hi Vivek,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This patch is enabling inline reclaim for fault path, but fault path
> > > > > > has already holds a locked exceptional entry which I believe the above
> > > > > > fuse_break_dax_layouts() needs to wait for, can you please elaborate
> > > > > > on how this can be avoided?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Liubo,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Can you please point to the exact lock you are referring to. I will
> > > > > check it out. Once we got rid of needing to take inode lock in
> > > > > reclaim path, that opended the door to do inline reclaim in fault
> > > > > path as well. But I was not aware of this exceptional entry lock.
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Vivek,
> > > > 
> > > > dax_iomap_{pte,pmd}_fault has called grab_mapping_entry to get a
> > > > locked entry, when this fault gets into inline reclaim, would
> > > > fuse_break_dax_layouts wait for the locked exceptional entry which is
> > > > locked in dax_iomap_{pte,pmd}_fault?
> > > 
> > > Hi Liu Bo,
> > > 
> > > This is a good point. Indeed it can deadlock the way code is written
> > > currently.
> > >
> > 
> > It's 100% reproducible on 4.19, but not on 5.x which has xarray for
> > dax_layout_busy_page.
> > 
> > It was weird that on 5.x kernel the deadlock is gone, it turned out
> > that xarray search in dax_layout_busy_page simply skips the empty
> > locked exceptional entry, I didn't get deeper to find out whether it's
> > reasonable, but with that 5.x doesn't run to deadlock.
> 
> I found more problems with enabling inline reclaim in fault path. I
> am holding fi->i_mmap_sem, shared and fuse_break_dax_layouts() can
> drop fi->i_mmap_sem if page is busy. I don't think we can drop and
> reacquire fi->i_mmap_sem while in fault path.
>

Good point, yes, dropping & reacquiring lock might bring more trouble
w.r.t race on the i_mmap_sem.

> Also fuse_break_dax_layouts() does not know if we are holding it
> shared or exclusive.
> 
> So I will probably have to go back to disable inline reclaim in
> fault path. If memory range is not available go back up in
> fuse_dax_fault(), drop fi->i_mmap_sem lock and wait on wait queue for
> a range to become free and retry.
> 
> I can retain the changes I did to break layout for a 2MB range only
> and not the whole file. I think that's a good optimization to retain
> anyway.
>

That part does look reasonable to me.

thanks,
liubo
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org