From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Cc: cmm@us.ibm.com, sandeen@redhat.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V4] ext4: Fix lockdep recursive locking warning
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 22:03:49 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081123163349.GB17002@skywalker> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081123024911.GG9150@mit.edu>
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 09:49:11PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 03:46:25PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:10:46PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > > Indicate that the group locks can be taken in loop.
> >
> > I've been looking at this patch more closely, and I think there's a
> > major problem here.
>
> OK, after looking at this in yet more detail (and having changed
> planes in Dallas :-), I am more than ever convinced this patch is not
> rightq. We have an rw_sem for each block group, grp->alloc_sem, which
> is allocated in groups of meta blockgroups. The whole reason why we
> should worry about keeping them in the same class is we should worry
> about is if for some reason, the multiblock allocator happens to
> allocate two block group's alloc_sem, but one does them out of order
> (say, bg 4, then bg 2, while another does bg 2, then 4), we would get
> a dead lock.
>
> I'm guessing that what caused the problem for you was
> ext4_mb_init_group(), which if you are using 1k filesystems, tries to
> grab multiple grp->alloc_sem's. In each place where we find those, we
> need to use down_write_nested --- see Documentation/lockdep-design.txt.
Correct
>
> If there are any other places in mballoc.c which grabs multiple
> alloc_sem's at the same time, we'll have to use define new subclasses.
No. That is the only call site.
How about the below patch. We can have more than 2 groups in a page
depending on the page size and blocksize. So instead of using
single_depth I guess we should use the relative group number ?.
diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 1fa311c..891ce41 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -1783,7 +1783,7 @@ static int ext4_mb_init_group(struct super_block *sb, ext4_group_t group)
* no block allocation going on in any
* of that groups
*/
- down_write(&grp->alloc_sem);
+ down_write_nested(&grp->alloc_sem, i);
}
/*
* make sure we look at only those groups
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-23 16:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-21 16:40 [PATCH -V4] ext4: Fix lockdep recursive locking warning Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-11-21 16:48 ` patchqueue update Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-11-22 20:46 ` [PATCH -V4] ext4: Fix lockdep recursive locking warning Theodore Tso
2008-11-23 2:49 ` Theodore Tso
2008-11-23 16:33 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2008-11-23 18:32 ` Theodore Tso
2008-11-24 5:02 ` Theodore Tso
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=20081123163349.GB17002@skywalker \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=tytso@MIT.EDU \
/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.