linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>,
	dm-devel@redhat.com, shli@kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dm: Avoid sleeping while holding the dm_bufio lock
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:56:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161117215635.GB23571@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1479410660-31408-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org>

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:24:20AM -0800, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> We've seen in-field reports showing _lots_ (18 in one case, 41 in
> another) of tasks all sitting there blocked on:
> 
>   mutex_lock+0x4c/0x68
>   dm_bufio_shrink_count+0x38/0x78
>   shrink_slab.part.54.constprop.65+0x100/0x464
>   shrink_zone+0xa8/0x198
> 
> In the two cases analyzed, we see one task that looks like this:
> 
>   Workqueue: kverityd verity_prefetch_io
> 
>   __switch_to+0x9c/0xa8
>   __schedule+0x440/0x6d8
>   schedule+0x94/0xb4
>   schedule_timeout+0x204/0x27c
>   schedule_timeout_uninterruptible+0x44/0x50
>   wait_iff_congested+0x9c/0x1f0
>   shrink_inactive_list+0x3a0/0x4cc
>   shrink_lruvec+0x418/0x5cc
>   shrink_zone+0x88/0x198
>   try_to_free_pages+0x51c/0x588
>   __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x648/0xa88
>   __get_free_pages+0x34/0x7c
>   alloc_buffer+0xa4/0x144
>   __bufio_new+0x84/0x278
>   dm_bufio_prefetch+0x9c/0x154
>   verity_prefetch_io+0xe8/0x10c
>   process_one_work+0x240/0x424
>   worker_thread+0x2fc/0x424
>   kthread+0x10c/0x114
> 
> ...and that looks to be the one holding the mutex.
> 
> The problem has been reproduced on fairly easily:
> 0. Be running Chrome OS w/ verity enabled on the root filesystem
> 1. Pick test patch: http://crosreview.com/412360
> 2. Install launchBalloons.sh and balloon.arm from
>      http://crbug.com/468342
>    ...that's just a memory stress test app.
> 3. On a 4GB rk3399 machine, run
>      nice ./launchBalloons.sh 4 900 100000
>    ...that tries to eat 4 * 900 MB of memory and keep accessing.
> 4. Login to the Chrome web browser and restore many tabs
> 
> With that, I've seen printouts like:
>   DOUG: long bufio 90758 ms
> ...and stack trace always show's we're in dm_bufio_prefetch().
> 
> The problem is that we try to allocate memory with GFP_NOIO while
> we're holding the dm_bufio lock.  Instead we should be using
> GFP_NOWAIT.  Using GFP_NOIO can cause us to sleep while holding the
> lock and that causes the above problems.
> 
> The current behavior explained by David Rientjes:
> 
>   It will still try reclaim initially because __GFP_WAIT (or
>   __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM) is set by GFP_NOIO.  This is the cause of
>   contention on dm_bufio_lock() that the thread holds.  You want to
>   pass GFP_NOWAIT instead of GFP_NOIO to alloc_buffer() when holding a
>   mutex that can be contended by a concurrent slab shrinker (if
>   count_objects didn't use a trylock, this pattern would trivially
>   deadlock).
> 
> Suggested-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>

Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

> ---
> Note that this change was developed and tested against the Chrome OS
> 4.4 kernel tree, not mainline.  Due to slight differences in verity
> between mainline and Chrome OS it became too difficult to reproduce my
> testing setup on mainline.  This patch still seems correct and
> relevant to upstream, so I'm posting it.  If this is not acceptible to
> you then please ignore this patch.
> 
> Also note that when I tested the Chrome OS 3.14 kernel tree I couldn't
> reproduce the long delays described in the patch.  Presumably
> something changed in either the kernel config or the memory management
> code between the two kernel versions that made this crop up.  In a
> similar vein, it is possible that problems described in this patch are
> no longer reproducible upstream.  However, the arguments made in this
> patch (that we don't want to block while holding the mutex) still
> apply so I think the patch may still have merit.
> 
>  drivers/md/dm-bufio.c | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c b/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c
> index b3ba142e59a4..3c767399cc59 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c
> @@ -827,7 +827,8 @@ static struct dm_buffer *__alloc_buffer_wait_no_callback(struct dm_bufio_client
>  	 * dm-bufio is resistant to allocation failures (it just keeps
>  	 * one buffer reserved in cases all the allocations fail).
>  	 * So set flags to not try too hard:
> -	 *	GFP_NOIO: don't recurse into the I/O layer
> +	 *	GFP_NOWAIT: don't wait; if we need to sleep we'll release our
> +	 *		    mutex and wait ourselves.
>  	 *	__GFP_NORETRY: don't retry and rather return failure
>  	 *	__GFP_NOMEMALLOC: don't use emergency reserves
>  	 *	__GFP_NOWARN: don't print a warning in case of failure
> @@ -837,7 +838,8 @@ static struct dm_buffer *__alloc_buffer_wait_no_callback(struct dm_bufio_client
>  	 */
>  	while (1) {
>  		if (dm_bufio_cache_size_latch != 1) {
> -			b = alloc_buffer(c, GFP_NOIO | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN);
> +			b = alloc_buffer(c, GFP_NOWAIT | __GFP_NORETRY |
> +					 __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN);
>  			if (b)
>  				return b;
>  		}
> -- 
> 2.8.0.rc3.226.g39d4020
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-17 21:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-17 19:24 [PATCH] dm: Avoid sleeping while holding the dm_bufio lock Douglas Anderson
2016-11-17 20:28 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-11-17 20:44   ` Doug Anderson
2016-11-17 20:48     ` Mike Snitzer
2016-11-17 21:56 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2016-11-23 20:57 ` [PATCH] " Mikulas Patocka
2016-12-08  0:54   ` Doug Anderson
2016-12-08 23:20     ` Mikulas Patocka
2016-12-13  0:08       ` Doug Anderson
2016-12-13 22:01         ` Doug Anderson
2016-12-15  0:53   ` Doug Anderson
2016-12-15  0:55     ` Doug Anderson

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=20161117215635.GB23571@roeck-us.net \
    --to=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=shli@kernel.org \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=sonnyrao@chromium.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).