From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: block, bfq: lockdep circular locking dependency gripe
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:54:14 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e312d95f-f37a-106d-97a2-9d8d4cc28c9d@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0B8A6A8E-453E-4E6E-886A-310A84B96FF5@linaro.org>
On 10/20/20 1:15 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> Il giorno 20 ott 2020, alle ore 08:15, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> ha scritto:
>>
>> [ 1917.361401] ======================================================
>> [ 1917.361406] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>> [ 1917.361413] 5.9.0.g7cf726a-master #2 Tainted: G S E
>> [ 1917.361417] ------------------------------------------------------
>> [ 1917.361422] kworker/u16:35/15995 is trying to acquire lock:
>> [ 1917.361428] ffff89232237f7e0 (&ioc->lock){..-.}-{2:2}, at: put_io_context+0x30/0x90
>> [ 1917.361440]
>> but task is already holding lock:
>> [ 1917.361445] ffff892244d2cc08 (&bfqd->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: bfq_insert_requests+0x89/0x680
>> [ 1917.361456]
>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>
>> [ 1917.361463]
>> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>> [ 1917.361469]
>> -> #1 (&bfqd->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
>> [ 1917.361479] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x50
>> [ 1917.361484] bfq_exit_icq_bfqq+0x48/0x3f0
>> [ 1917.361489] bfq_exit_icq+0x13/0x20
>> [ 1917.361494] put_io_context_active+0x55/0x80
>> [ 1917.361499] do_exit+0x72c/0xca0
>> [ 1917.361504] do_group_exit+0x47/0xb0
>> [ 1917.361508] __x64_sys_exit_group+0x14/0x20
>> [ 1917.361513] do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
>> [ 1917.361518] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>> [ 1917.361523]
>> -> #0 (&ioc->lock){..-.}-{2:2}:
>> [ 1917.361532] __lock_acquire+0x149d/0x1a70
>> [ 1917.361537] lock_acquire+0x1a7/0x3b0
>> [ 1917.361542] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x50
>> [ 1917.361547] put_io_context+0x30/0x90
>> [ 1917.361552] blk_mq_free_request+0x4f/0x140
>> [ 1917.361557] blk_attempt_req_merge+0x19/0x30
>> [ 1917.361563] elv_attempt_insert_merge+0x4f/0x90
>> [ 1917.361568] blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge+0x28/0x40
>> [ 1917.361574] bfq_insert_requests+0x94/0x680
>> [ 1917.361579] blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0xd1/0x2a0
>> [ 1917.361584] blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x12d/0x240
>> [ 1917.361589] blk_flush_plug_list+0xb4/0xd0
>> [ 1917.361594] io_schedule_prepare+0x3c/0x40
>> [ 1917.361599] io_schedule+0xb/0x40
>> [ 1917.361604] blk_mq_get_tag+0x13a/0x250
>> [ 1917.361608] __blk_mq_alloc_request+0x5c/0x130
>> [ 1917.361613] blk_mq_submit_bio+0xf3/0x770
>> [ 1917.361618] submit_bio_noacct+0x41e/0x4b0
>> [ 1917.361622] submit_bio+0x33/0x160
>> [ 1917.361644] ext4_io_submit+0x49/0x60 [ext4]
>> [ 1917.361661] ext4_writepages+0x683/0x1070 [ext4]
>> [ 1917.361667] do_writepages+0x3c/0xe0
>> [ 1917.361672] __writeback_single_inode+0x62/0x630
>> [ 1917.361677] writeback_sb_inodes+0x218/0x4d0
>> [ 1917.361681] __writeback_inodes_wb+0x5f/0xc0
>> [ 1917.361686] wb_writeback+0x283/0x490
>> [ 1917.361691] wb_workfn+0x29a/0x670
>> [ 1917.361696] process_one_work+0x283/0x620
>> [ 1917.361701] worker_thread+0x39/0x3f0
>> [ 1917.361706] kthread+0x152/0x170
>> [ 1917.361711] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>> [ 1917.361715]
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>>
>> [ 1917.361722] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>
>> [ 1917.361728] CPU0 CPU1
>> [ 1917.361731] ---- ----
>> [ 1917.361736] lock(&bfqd->lock);
>> [ 1917.361740] lock(&ioc->lock);
>> [ 1917.361746] lock(&bfqd->lock);
>> [ 1917.361752] lock(&ioc->lock);
>> [ 1917.361757]
>> *** DEADLOCK ***
>>
>> [ 1917.361763] 5 locks held by kworker/u16:35/15995:
>> [ 1917.361767] #0: ffff892240c9bd38 ((wq_completion)writeback){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1fa/0x620
>> [ 1917.361778] #1: ffff94569342fe78 ((work_completion)(&(&wb->dwork)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1fa/0x620
>> [ 1917.361789] #2: ffff8921424ae0e0 (&type->s_umount_key#39){++++}-{3:3}, at: trylock_super+0x16/0x50
>> [ 1917.361800] #3: ffff8921424aaa40 (&sbi->s_writepages_rwsem){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: do_writepages+0x3c/0xe0
>> [ 1917.361811] #4: ffff892244d2cc08 (&bfqd->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: bfq_insert_requests+0x89/0x680
>> [ 1917.361821]
>> stack backtrace:
>> [ 1917.361827] CPU: 6 PID: 15995 Comm: kworker/u16:35 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G S E 5.9.0.g7cf726a-master #2
>> [ 1917.361833] Hardware name: MEDION MS-7848/MS-7848, BIOS M7848W08.20C 09/23/2013
>> [ 1917.361840] Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-8:32)
>> [ 1917.361846] Call Trace:
>> [ 1917.361854] dump_stack+0x77/0x97
>> [ 1917.361860] check_noncircular+0xe7/0x100
>> [ 1917.361866] ? __lock_acquire+0x2ce/0x1a70
>> [ 1917.361872] ? __lock_acquire+0x149d/0x1a70
>> [ 1917.361877] __lock_acquire+0x149d/0x1a70
>> [ 1917.361884] lock_acquire+0x1a7/0x3b0
>> [ 1917.361889] ? put_io_context+0x30/0x90
>> [ 1917.361894] ? bfq_put_queue+0xcf/0x480
>> [ 1917.361901] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3d/0x50
>> [ 1917.361906] ? put_io_context+0x30/0x90
>> [ 1917.361911] put_io_context+0x30/0x90
>> [ 1917.361916] blk_mq_free_request+0x4f/0x140
>> [ 1917.361921] blk_attempt_req_merge+0x19/0x30
>> [ 1917.361926] elv_attempt_insert_merge+0x4f/0x90
>> [ 1917.361932] blk_mq_sched_try_insert_merge+0x28/0x40
>> [ 1917.361937] bfq_insert_requests+0x94/0x680
>> [ 1917.361944] blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0xd1/0x2a0
>> [ 1917.361950] blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x12d/0x240
>> [ 1917.361956] blk_flush_plug_list+0xb4/0xd0
>> [ 1917.361962] io_schedule_prepare+0x3c/0x40
>> [ 1917.361967] io_schedule+0xb/0x40
>> [ 1917.361972] blk_mq_get_tag+0x13a/0x250
>> [ 1917.361978] ? wait_woken+0xa0/0xa0
>> [ 1917.361984] __blk_mq_alloc_request+0x5c/0x130
>> [ 1917.361989] blk_mq_submit_bio+0xf3/0x770
>> [ 1917.361996] submit_bio_noacct+0x41e/0x4b0
>> [ 1917.362002] ? submit_bio+0x33/0x160
>> [ 1917.362007] submit_bio+0x33/0x160
>> [ 1917.362028] ext4_io_submit+0x49/0x60 [ext4]
>> [ 1917.362045] ext4_writepages+0x683/0x1070 [ext4]
>> [ 1917.362056] ? do_writepages+0x3c/0xe0
>> [ 1917.362060] do_writepages+0x3c/0xe0
>> [ 1917.362067] ? __writeback_single_inode+0x62/0x630
>> [ 1917.362072] __writeback_single_inode+0x62/0x630
>> [ 1917.362078] writeback_sb_inodes+0x218/0x4d0
>> [ 1917.362087] __writeback_inodes_wb+0x5f/0xc0
>> [ 1917.362093] wb_writeback+0x283/0x490
>> [ 1917.362100] ? wb_workfn+0x29a/0x670
>> [ 1917.362104] wb_workfn+0x29a/0x670
>> [ 1917.362112] ? process_one_work+0x283/0x620
>> [ 1917.362117] ? process_one_work+0x251/0x620
>> [ 1917.362121] process_one_work+0x283/0x620
>> [ 1917.362128] worker_thread+0x39/0x3f0
>> [ 1917.362133] ? process_one_work+0x620/0x620
>> [ 1917.362138] kthread+0x152/0x170
>> [ 1917.362142] ? kthread_park+0x90/0x90
>> [ 1917.362148] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>
> Hi,
> that's apparently hard to solve inside bfq. The the ioc of the task is
> being exited while the task is still inside the code for having an I/O
> request served. Is still normal?
(please don't top post...)
First of all, never assume you have to work around what appears to be
core issues in BFQ. That doesn't mean the problem is unsolvable, just
that it might need solving outside of BFQ.
For this particular one, not sure how we could solve it in the core,
though. BFQ's normal locking dependency is bfqd -> ioc, but for exiting
ioc, it's naturally the other way around.
Below is a bit of a hack for this - use trylock, and if we fail, then
just punt it to an async helper instead. Not meant to be a final patch,
but mainly to spark inspiration on how this could be fixed.
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index 9e81d1052091..d67499d871af 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -4936,22 +4936,51 @@ static void bfq_exit_bfqq(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
bfq_release_process_ref(bfqd, bfqq);
}
-static void bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync)
+static void __bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, struct bfq_data *bfqd,
+ struct bfq_queue *bfqq, bool is_sync)
{
- struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, is_sync);
- struct bfq_data *bfqd;
+ bfqq->bic = NULL;
+ bfq_exit_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq);
+ bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, is_sync);
+}
- if (bfqq)
- bfqd = bfqq->bfqd; /* NULL if scheduler already exited */
+static bool bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(struct bfq_io_cq *bic, bool is_sync)
+{
+ struct bfq_queue *bfqq;
+ struct bfq_data *bfqd;
+ unsigned long flags;
- if (bfqq && bfqd) {
- unsigned long flags;
+ bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, is_sync);
+ if (!bfqq || !bfqq->bfqd)
+ return true;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&bfqd->lock, flags);
- bfqq->bic = NULL;
- bfq_exit_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq);
- bic_set_bfqq(bic, NULL, is_sync);
+ bfqd = bfqq->bfqd;
+ if (spin_trylock_irqsave(&bfqd->lock, flags)) {
+ __bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, bfqd, bfqq, is_sync);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags);
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
+}
+
+static void bfq_exit_work(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+ struct bfq_io_cq *bic = container_of(work, struct bfq_io_cq, work);
+ bool is_sync = true;
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
+ struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bic_to_bfqq(bic, is_sync);
+
+ if (bfqq && bfqq->bfqd) {
+ struct bfq_data *bfqd = bfqq->bfqd;
+
+ spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
+ __bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, bfqd, bfqq, is_sync);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
+ }
+ is_sync = !!is_sync;
}
}
@@ -4959,8 +4988,11 @@ static void bfq_exit_icq(struct io_cq *icq)
{
struct bfq_io_cq *bic = icq_to_bic(icq);
- bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, true);
- bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, false);
+ if (bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, true) && bfq_exit_icq_bfqq(bic, false))
+ return;
+
+ INIT_WORK(&bic->work, bfq_exit_work);
+ schedule_work(&bic->work);
}
/*
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h
index 703895224562..94d6827bbb65 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.h
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h
@@ -435,6 +435,11 @@ struct bfq_io_cq {
unsigned long saved_wr_start_at_switch_to_srt;
unsigned int saved_wr_cur_max_time;
struct bfq_ttime saved_ttime;
+
+ /*
+ * Exit work, to avoid lock dependency ordering issues
+ */
+ struct work_struct work;
};
/**
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-20 16:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-20 6:15 block, bfq: lockdep circular locking dependency gripe Mike Galbraith
2020-10-20 7:15 ` Paolo Valente
2020-10-20 16:54 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-10-21 6:05 ` Paolo Valente
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=e312d95f-f37a-106d-97a2-9d8d4cc28c9d@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.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).