From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@suse.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bug] as_merged_requests(): possible recursive locking detected
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:12:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080201101212.GK15220@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1201860191.10128.0.camel@nikanth-laptop.blr.novell.com>
On Fri, Feb 01 2008, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 23:14 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Jens,
> >
> > AS still has some locking issues - see the lockdep warning below that
> > the x86 test-rig just triggered. Config attached. Never saw this one
> > before. Can send more info if needed.
> >
>
> The io_contexts are swapped. And while swapping, the locks were also
> getting swapped, which will change the order of locking after that. This
> may be the cause of these warning. I am not sure whether not swapping
> the locks is the right way to fix this. Using a field of spinlock_t
> itself to order locking might be better, instead of the address of the
> container.
>
> Now while adding a new member to io_context, one should not forget to
> add it here. Also copying whole io_context and then restoring the locks
> might have a window where this warning could be triggered.
Oops, the locks should definitely be left alone. It's not just the
locking order, but also it would confuse lockdep.
> diff --git a/block/blk-ioc.c b/block/blk-ioc.c
> index 6d16755..b9c6e39 100644
> --- a/block/blk-ioc.c
> +++ b/block/blk-ioc.c
> @@ -179,9 +179,32 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(copy_io_context);
> void swap_io_context(struct io_context **ioc1, struct io_context **ioc2)
> {
> struct io_context *temp;
> +
> + /*
> + * Do not swap the locks to preserve locking order
> + */
> +
> temp = *ioc1;
> - *ioc1 = *ioc2;
> - *ioc2 = temp;
> +
> + (*ioc1)->refcount = (*ioc2)->refcount;
> + (*ioc1)->nr_tasks = (*ioc2)->nr_tasks;
> + (*ioc1)->ioprio = (*ioc2)->ioprio;
> + (*ioc1)->ioprio_changed = (*ioc2)->ioprio_changed;
> + (*ioc1)->last_waited = (*ioc2)->last_waited;
> + (*ioc1)->nr_batch_requests = (*ioc2)->nr_batch_requests;
> + (*ioc1)->aic = (*ioc2)->aic;
> + (*ioc1)->radix_root = (*ioc2)->radix_root;
> + (*ioc1)->ioc_data = (*ioc2)->ioc_data;
> +
> + (*ioc2)->refcount = (temp)->refcount;
> + (*ioc2)->nr_tasks = (temp)->nr_tasks;
> + (*ioc2)->ioprio = (temp)->ioprio;
> + (*ioc2)->ioprio_changed = (temp)->ioprio_changed;
> + (*ioc2)->last_waited = (temp)->last_waited;
> + (*ioc2)->nr_batch_requests = (temp)->nr_batch_requests;
> + (*ioc2)->aic = (temp)->aic;
> + (*ioc2)->radix_root = (temp)->radix_root;
> + (*ioc2)->ioc_data = (temp)->ioc_data;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(swap_io_context);
Ugh, that's pretty horrible. How about moving the lock first in the
struct and just doing memcpy()? Still ugly, but better.
I think the right solution is to remove swap_io_context() and fix the io
context referencing in as-iosched.c instead.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-01 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-31 22:14 [bug] as_merged_requests(): possible recursive locking detected Ingo Molnar
2008-01-31 22:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-01 8:40 ` Jens Axboe
2008-02-01 10:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-01 10:47 ` Jens Axboe
2008-02-01 11:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-01 11:22 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] ` <47A35177.BANGALORE.BLR.100.174746A.1.1085C.1@1:7.BANGALORE.BLR.100.0.1.0.1@16>
2008-02-01 11:53 ` Fwd: " Nikanth Karthikesan
2008-02-01 10:03 ` Nikanth Karthikesan
2008-02-01 10:12 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2008-02-01 10:31 ` Jens Axboe
2008-02-02 0:54 ` Nick Piggin
2008-02-01 11:00 ` Nikanth Karthikesan
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=20080201101212.GK15220@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=knikanth@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.