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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,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 999B5C3A59E for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:57:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0FF22CE3 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:57:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728406AbfHUS5E (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2019 14:57:04 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:47683 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726903AbfHUS5E (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2019 14:57:04 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Aug 2019 11:57:03 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,412,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="203121300" Received: from iweiny-desk2.sc.intel.com ([10.3.52.157]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Aug 2019 11:57:03 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 11:57:03 -0700 From: Ira Weiny To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Dave Chinner , Jan Kara , Andrew Morton , Dan Williams , Matthew Wilcox , Theodore Ts'o , John Hubbard , Michal Hocko , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] RDMA/FS DAX truncate proposal V1,000,002 ;-) Message-ID: <20190821185703.GB5965@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> References: <20190815130558.GF14313@quack2.suse.cz> <20190816190528.GB371@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> <20190817022603.GW6129@dread.disaster.area> <20190819063412.GA20455@quack2.suse.cz> <20190819092409.GM7777@dread.disaster.area> <20190819123841.GC5058@ziepe.ca> <20190820011210.GP7777@dread.disaster.area> <20190820115515.GA29246@ziepe.ca> <20190821180200.GA5965@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> <20190821181343.GH8653@ziepe.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190821181343.GH8653@ziepe.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01) Sender: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 03:13:43PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 11:02:00AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 08:55:15AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 11:12:10AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:38:41AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 07:24:09PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > So that leaves just the normal close() syscall exit case, where the > > > > > > application has full control of the order in which resources are > > > > > > released. We've already established that we can block in this > > > > > > context. Blocking in an interruptible state will allow fatal signal > > > > > > delivery to wake us, and then we fall into the > > > > > > fatal_signal_pending() case if we get a SIGKILL while blocking. > > > > > > > > > > The major problem with RDMA is that it doesn't always wait on close() for the > > > > > MR holding the page pins to be destoyed. This is done to avoid a > > > > > deadlock of the form: > > > > > > > > > > uverbs_destroy_ufile_hw() > > > > > mutex_lock() > > > > > [..] > > > > > mmput() > > > > > exit_mmap() > > > > > remove_vma() > > > > > fput(); > > > > > file_operations->release() > > > > > > > > I think this is wrong, and I'm pretty sure it's an example of why > > > > the final __fput() call is moved out of line. > > > > > > Yes, I think so too, all I can say is this *used* to happen, as we > > > have special code avoiding it, which is the code that is messing up > > > Ira's lifetime model. > > > > > > Ira, you could try unraveling the special locking, that solves your > > > lifetime issues? > > > > Yes I will try to prove this out... But I'm still not sure this fully solves > > the problem. > > > > This only ensures that the process which has the RDMA context (RDMA FD) is safe > > with regard to hanging the close for the "data file FD" (the file which has > > pinned pages) in that _same_ process. But what about the scenario. > > Oh, I didn't think we were talking about that. Hanging the close of > the datafile fd contingent on some other FD's closure is a recipe for > deadlock.. The discussion between Jan and Dave was concerning what happens when a user calls fd = open() fnctl(...getlease...) addr = mmap(fd...) ib_reg_mr() munmap(addr...) close(fd) Dave suggested: "I'm of a mind to make the last close() on a file block if there's an active layout lease to prevent processes from zombie-ing layout leases like this. i.e. you can't close the fd until resources that pin the lease have been released." -- Dave https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/16/994 > > IMHO the pin refcnt is held by the driver char dev FD, that is the > object you need to make it visible against. I'm sorry but what do you mean by "driver char dev FD"? > > Why not just have a single table someplace of all the layout leases > with the file they are held on and the FD/socket/etc that is holding > the pin? Make it independent of processes and FDs? If it is independent of processes how will we know which process is blocking the truncate? Using a global table is an interesting idea but I still believe the users are going to want to track this to specific processes. It's not clear to me how that would be done with a global table. I agree the XDP/socket case is bothersome... I was thinking that somewhere the fd of the socket could be hooked up in this case. But taking a look at it reveals that is not going to be easy. And I assume XDP has the same issue WRT SCM_RIGHTS and the ability to share the xdp context? Ira > > Jason