linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Spurious EIO on AIO+DIO+RWF_NOWAIT
@ 2018-12-09 11:19 Avi Kivity
  2018-12-10 12:48 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2018-12-09 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel, linux-aio, Goldwyn Rodrigues

I have an application that receives spurious EIO when running with 
RWF_NOWAIT enabled. Removing RWF_NOWAIT causes those EIOs to disappear. 
The application uses AIO+DIO, and errors were seen on both xfs and ext4.


I suspect the following code:


/*
  * Process one completed BIO.  No locks are held.
  */
static blk_status_t dio_bio_complete(struct dio *dio, struct bio *bio)
{
         struct bio_vec *bvec;
         unsigned i;
         blk_status_t err = bio->bi_status;

         if (err) {
                 if (err == BLK_STS_AGAIN && (bio->bi_opf & REQ_NOWAIT))
                         dio->io_error = -EAGAIN;
                 else
                         dio->io_error = -EIO;
         }

Could it be that REQ_NOWAIT was dropped from bio->bi_opf? or that 
bio->bi_status got changed along the way?


Reducing the test case may be a lot of work, but I can package a binary 
using docker if a reproducer is needed. Seen on 4.18.19 and 4.19.something.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Spurious EIO on AIO+DIO+RWF_NOWAIT
  2018-12-09 11:19 Spurious EIO on AIO+DIO+RWF_NOWAIT Avi Kivity
@ 2018-12-10 12:48 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
  2018-12-10 12:49   ` Avi Kivity
  2018-12-12 12:05   ` Avi Kivity
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Goldwyn Rodrigues @ 2018-12-10 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-aio

On 13:19 09/12, Avi Kivity wrote:
> I have an application that receives spurious EIO when running with
> RWF_NOWAIT enabled. Removing RWF_NOWAIT causes those EIOs to disappear. The
> application uses AIO+DIO, and errors were seen on both xfs and ext4.
> 
> 
> I suspect the following code:
> 
> 
> /*
>  * Process one completed BIO.  No locks are held.
>  */
> static blk_status_t dio_bio_complete(struct dio *dio, struct bio *bio)
> {
>         struct bio_vec *bvec;
>         unsigned i;
>         blk_status_t err = bio->bi_status;
> 
>         if (err) {
>                 if (err == BLK_STS_AGAIN && (bio->bi_opf & REQ_NOWAIT))
>                         dio->io_error = -EAGAIN;
>                 else
>                         dio->io_error = -EIO;
>         }
> 
> Could it be that REQ_NOWAIT was dropped from bio->bi_opf? or that
> bio->bi_status got changed along the way?
> 

I don't think REQ_NOWAIT is dropped. I am assuming bio->bi_status error
is set differently. Is the blk queue being stopped? Is it possible to
instrument the kernel in your testcase?

-- 
Goldwyn

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Spurious EIO on AIO+DIO+RWF_NOWAIT
  2018-12-10 12:48 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
@ 2018-12-10 12:49   ` Avi Kivity
  2018-12-12 12:05   ` Avi Kivity
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2018-12-10 12:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Goldwyn Rodrigues; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-aio


On 10/12/2018 14.48, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
> On 13:19 09/12, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> I have an application that receives spurious EIO when running with
>> RWF_NOWAIT enabled. Removing RWF_NOWAIT causes those EIOs to disappear. The
>> application uses AIO+DIO, and errors were seen on both xfs and ext4.
>>
>>
>> I suspect the following code:
>>
>>
>> /*
>>   * Process one completed BIO.  No locks are held.
>>   */
>> static blk_status_t dio_bio_complete(struct dio *dio, struct bio *bio)
>> {
>>          struct bio_vec *bvec;
>>          unsigned i;
>>          blk_status_t err = bio->bi_status;
>>
>>          if (err) {
>>                  if (err == BLK_STS_AGAIN && (bio->bi_opf & REQ_NOWAIT))
>>                          dio->io_error = -EAGAIN;
>>                  else
>>                          dio->io_error = -EIO;
>>          }
>>
>> Could it be that REQ_NOWAIT was dropped from bio->bi_opf? or that
>> bio->bi_status got changed along the way?
>>
> I don't think REQ_NOWAIT is dropped. I am assuming bio->bi_status error
> is set differently. Is the blk queue being stopped?


Not that I know of.


> Is it possible to
> instrument the kernel in your testcase?
>

I'm happy to apply patches, or run systemtap (or similar) scripts.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Spurious EIO on AIO+DIO+RWF_NOWAIT
  2018-12-10 12:48 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
  2018-12-10 12:49   ` Avi Kivity
@ 2018-12-12 12:05   ` Avi Kivity
  2018-12-12 14:41     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2018-12-12 12:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Goldwyn Rodrigues; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-aio

On 12/10/18 2:48 PM, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
> On 13:19 09/12, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> I have an application that receives spurious EIO when running with
>> RWF_NOWAIT enabled. Removing RWF_NOWAIT causes those EIOs to disappear. The
>> application uses AIO+DIO, and errors were seen on both xfs and ext4.
>>
>>
>> I suspect the following code:
>>
>>
>> /*
>>   * Process one completed BIO.  No locks are held.
>>   */
>> static blk_status_t dio_bio_complete(struct dio *dio, struct bio *bio)
>> {
>>          struct bio_vec *bvec;
>>          unsigned i;
>>          blk_status_t err = bio->bi_status;
>>
>>          if (err) {
>>                  if (err == BLK_STS_AGAIN && (bio->bi_opf & REQ_NOWAIT))
>>                          dio->io_error = -EAGAIN;
>>                  else
>>                          dio->io_error = -EIO;
>>          }
>>
>> Could it be that REQ_NOWAIT was dropped from bio->bi_opf? or that
>> bio->bi_status got changed along the way?
>>
> I don't think REQ_NOWAIT is dropped. I am assuming bio->bi_status error
> is set differently. Is the blk queue being stopped? Is it possible to
> instrument the kernel in your testcase?
>

I traced the function, and I see bio->bi_status == BLK_STS_NOTSUPP and 
bio->bi_opf == REQ_OP_WRITE|REQ_SYNC|REQ_NOMERGE|REQ_FUA|REQ_NOWAIT. 
Presumably the NOTSUPP is the result of NOWAIT not being supported down 
the stack, but shouldn't it be detected earlier? And not converted to EIO?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: Spurious EIO on AIO+DIO+RWF_NOWAIT
  2018-12-12 12:05   ` Avi Kivity
@ 2018-12-12 14:41     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Goldwyn Rodrigues @ 2018-12-12 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-aio

On 14:05 12/12, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/10/18 2:48 PM, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
> > On 13:19 09/12, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > I have an application that receives spurious EIO when running with
> > > RWF_NOWAIT enabled. Removing RWF_NOWAIT causes those EIOs to disappear. The
> > > application uses AIO+DIO, and errors were seen on both xfs and ext4.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I suspect the following code:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > /*
> > >   * Process one completed BIO.  No locks are held.
> > >   */
> > > static blk_status_t dio_bio_complete(struct dio *dio, struct bio *bio)
> > > {
> > >          struct bio_vec *bvec;
> > >          unsigned i;
> > >          blk_status_t err = bio->bi_status;
> > > 
> > >          if (err) {
> > >                  if (err == BLK_STS_AGAIN && (bio->bi_opf & REQ_NOWAIT))
> > >                          dio->io_error = -EAGAIN;
> > >                  else
> > >                          dio->io_error = -EIO;
> > >          }
> > > 
> > > Could it be that REQ_NOWAIT was dropped from bio->bi_opf? or that
> > > bio->bi_status got changed along the way?
> > > 
> > I don't think REQ_NOWAIT is dropped. I am assuming bio->bi_status error
> > is set differently. Is the blk queue being stopped? Is it possible to
> > instrument the kernel in your testcase?
> > 
> 
> I traced the function, and I see bio->bi_status == BLK_STS_NOTSUPP and
> bio->bi_opf == REQ_OP_WRITE|REQ_SYNC|REQ_NOMERGE|REQ_FUA|REQ_NOWAIT.
> Presumably the NOTSUPP is the result of NOWAIT not being supported down the
> stack, but shouldn't it be detected earlier? And not converted to EIO?
> 

I don't think there is a way to detect it earlier. However, I think we should
return -EOPNOTSUPP if the lower layers do not support REQ_NOWAIT. I will write
a patch to modify this.

-- 
Goldwyn

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2018-12-12 14:41 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-12-09 11:19 Spurious EIO on AIO+DIO+RWF_NOWAIT Avi Kivity
2018-12-10 12:48 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2018-12-10 12:49   ` Avi Kivity
2018-12-12 12:05   ` Avi Kivity
2018-12-12 14:41     ` Goldwyn Rodrigues

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).