linux-nvdimm.lists.01.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Linux fsdevel mailing list <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	willy@infradead.org
Cc: virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>,
	Sergio Lopez <slp@redhat.com>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] dax: Fix missed wakeup in put_unlocked_entry()
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 13:35:24 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210416173524.GA1379987@redhat.com> (raw)

I am seeing missed wakeups which ultimately lead to a deadlock when I am
using virtiofs with DAX enabled and running "make -j". I had to mount
virtiofs as rootfs and also reduce to dax window size to 32M to reproduce
the problem consistently.

This is not a complete patch. I am just proposing this partial fix to
highlight the issue and trying to figure out how it should be fixed.
Should it be fixed in generic dax code or should filesystem (fuse/virtiofs)
take care of this.

So here is the problem. put_unlocked_entry() wakes up waiters only
if entry is not null as well as !dax_is_conflict(entry). But if I
call multiple instances of invalidate_inode_pages2() in parallel,
then I can run into a situation where there are waiters on 
this index but nobody will wait these.

invalidate_inode_pages2()
  invalidate_inode_pages2_range()
    invalidate_exceptional_entry2()
      dax_invalidate_mapping_entry_sync()
        __dax_invalidate_entry() {
		xas_lock_irq(&xas);
		entry = get_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0);
		...
		...
		dax_disassociate_entry(entry, mapping, trunc);
		xas_store(&xas, NULL);
		...
		...
	        put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
        	xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
	} 

Say a fault in in progress and it has locked entry at offset say "0x1c".
Now say three instances of invalidate_inode_pages2() are in progress
(A, B, C) and they all try to invalidate entry at offset "0x1c". Given
dax entry is locked, all tree instances A, B, C will wait in wait queue.

When dax fault finishes, say A is woken up. It will store NULL entry
at index "0x1c" and wake up B. When B comes along it will find "entry=0"
at page offset 0x1c and it will call put_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0). And
this means put_unlocked_entry() will not wake up next waiter, given
the current code. And that means C continues to wait and is not woken
up.

In my case I am seeing that dax page fault path itself is waiting
on grab_mapping_entry() and also invalidate_inode_page2() is 
waiting in get_unlocked_entry() but entry has already been cleaned
up and nobody woke up these processes. Atleast I think that's what
is happening.

This patch wakes up a process even if entry=0. And deadlock does not
happen. I am running into some OOM issues, that will debug.

So my question is that is it a dax issue and should it be fixed in
dax layer. Or should it be handled in fuse to make sure that
multiple instances of invalidate_inode_pages2() on same inode
don't make progress in parallel and introduce enough locking
around it.

Right now fuse_finish_open() calls invalidate_inode_pages2() without
any locking. That allows it to make progress in parallel to dax
fault path as well as allows multiple instances of invalidate_inode_pages2()
to run in parallel.

Not-yet-signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
---
 fs/dax.c |    7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Index: redhat-linux/fs/dax.c
===================================================================
--- redhat-linux.orig/fs/dax.c	2021-04-16 12:50:40.141363317 -0400
+++ redhat-linux/fs/dax.c	2021-04-16 12:51:42.385926390 -0400
@@ -266,9 +266,10 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct x
 
 static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
 {
-	/* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */
-	if (entry && !dax_is_conflict(entry))
-		dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, false);
+	if (dax_is_conflict(entry))
+		return;
+
+	dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, false);
 }
 
 /*
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org

             reply	other threads:[~2021-04-16 17:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-16 17:35 Vivek Goyal [this message]
2021-04-16 19:56 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-16 21:24   ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 10:07     ` Jan Kara

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=20210416173524.GA1379987@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --cc=slp@redhat.com \
    --cc=virtio-fs@redhat.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] dax: Fix missed wakeup in put_unlocked_entry()' \
    /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

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).