From: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Simon Kirby <sim@hostway.ca>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS read hangs in 3.1-rc10
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 22:29:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111021202911.GA1633@x4.trippels.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111021132240.GA24136@infradead.org>
On 2011.10.21 at 09:22 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 03:42:14PM -0700, Simon Kirby wrote:
> >
> > [<ffffffff8126f205>] xfs_reclaim_inode+0x85/0x2b0
> > [<ffffffff8126f5b0>] xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag+0x180/0x2f0
> > [<ffffffff8126f74e>] xfs_reclaim_inodes_nr+0x2e/0x40
> > [<ffffffff8126ccf0>] xfs_fs_free_cached_objects+0x10/0x20
> > [<ffffffff81119a70>] prune_super+0x110/0x1b0
> > [<ffffffff810e4fa5>] shrink_slab+0x1e5/0x2a0
> > [<ffffffff810e5821>] kswapd+0x7c1/0xba0
> > [<ffffffff8107ada6>] kthread+0x96/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff816c0474>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
> > [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>
> We're stuck in synchronous inode reclaim.
>
> > All of the other processes that get stuck have this stack:
> >
> > [<ffffffff81080587>] down+0x47/0x50
> > [<ffffffff8125e816>] xfs_buf_lock+0x66/0xd0
> > [<ffffffff812603ad>] _xfs_buf_find+0x16d/0x270
> > [<ffffffff81260517>] xfs_buf_get+0x67/0x1a0
> > [<ffffffff8126067a>] xfs_buf_read+0x2a/0x120
> > [<ffffffff812b876f>] xfs_trans_read_buf+0x28f/0x3f0
> > [<ffffffff8129e161>] xfs_read_agi+0x71/0x100
>
> They are waiting for the AGI buffer to become unlocked. The only reason
> it is held locked for longer time is when it is under I/O.
>
> >
> > By the way, xfs_reclaim_inode+0x85 (133) disassembles as:
>
> >
> > ...So the next function is wait_for_completion(), which is marked
> > __sched and thus doesn't show up in the trace.
>
> So we're waiting for the inode to be flushed, aka I/O again.
>
> What is interesting here is that we're always blocking on the AGI
> buffer - which is used during unlinks of inodes, and thus gets hit
> fairly heavily for a workload that does a lot of unlinks.
>
> Given that you are doing a lot of unlinks I wonder if it is related
> to the recent ail pushing issues in that area. While your symptoms
> looks completely different we could be blocking on the flush completion
> for an inode that gets stuck in the AIL.
>
> Can you run with latest 3.0-stable plus the patches at:
Please not that he saw this in 3.1-rc10, too. And this version already
contains the fixes:
% git describe --contains 0030807c66f0582
v3.1-rc10~5^2
I just saw similar symptoms while running a weekly rsync backup job. The
machine was stuck for a few seconds several times during that time (no
response to mouse or keyboard input). It always recovered by itself
after a short while.
This is an example output of latencytop during the rsync run:
Cause Maximum Percentage
[xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag] 7847.0 msec 16.6 %
Fork() system call 7777.1 msec 25.5 %
Creating block layer request 5352.5 msec 18.1 %
[xfs_buf_iowait] 2000.4 msec 14.7 %
[down] 959.7 msec 2.0 %
Page fault 637.3 msec 1.4 %
[xfs_iunpin_wait] 557.4 msec 0.7 %
Unlinking file 66.8 msec 0.1 %
I also took some "perf timechart" recordings. If there is interest I
could post the svg images somewhere.
--
Markus
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Simon Kirby <sim@hostway.ca>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS read hangs in 3.1-rc10
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 22:29:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111021202911.GA1633@x4.trippels.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111021132240.GA24136@infradead.org>
On 2011.10.21 at 09:22 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 03:42:14PM -0700, Simon Kirby wrote:
> >
> > [<ffffffff8126f205>] xfs_reclaim_inode+0x85/0x2b0
> > [<ffffffff8126f5b0>] xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag+0x180/0x2f0
> > [<ffffffff8126f74e>] xfs_reclaim_inodes_nr+0x2e/0x40
> > [<ffffffff8126ccf0>] xfs_fs_free_cached_objects+0x10/0x20
> > [<ffffffff81119a70>] prune_super+0x110/0x1b0
> > [<ffffffff810e4fa5>] shrink_slab+0x1e5/0x2a0
> > [<ffffffff810e5821>] kswapd+0x7c1/0xba0
> > [<ffffffff8107ada6>] kthread+0x96/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff816c0474>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
> > [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>
> We're stuck in synchronous inode reclaim.
>
> > All of the other processes that get stuck have this stack:
> >
> > [<ffffffff81080587>] down+0x47/0x50
> > [<ffffffff8125e816>] xfs_buf_lock+0x66/0xd0
> > [<ffffffff812603ad>] _xfs_buf_find+0x16d/0x270
> > [<ffffffff81260517>] xfs_buf_get+0x67/0x1a0
> > [<ffffffff8126067a>] xfs_buf_read+0x2a/0x120
> > [<ffffffff812b876f>] xfs_trans_read_buf+0x28f/0x3f0
> > [<ffffffff8129e161>] xfs_read_agi+0x71/0x100
>
> They are waiting for the AGI buffer to become unlocked. The only reason
> it is held locked for longer time is when it is under I/O.
>
> >
> > By the way, xfs_reclaim_inode+0x85 (133) disassembles as:
>
> >
> > ...So the next function is wait_for_completion(), which is marked
> > __sched and thus doesn't show up in the trace.
>
> So we're waiting for the inode to be flushed, aka I/O again.
>
> What is interesting here is that we're always blocking on the AGI
> buffer - which is used during unlinks of inodes, and thus gets hit
> fairly heavily for a workload that does a lot of unlinks.
>
> Given that you are doing a lot of unlinks I wonder if it is related
> to the recent ail pushing issues in that area. While your symptoms
> looks completely different we could be blocking on the flush completion
> for an inode that gets stuck in the AIL.
>
> Can you run with latest 3.0-stable plus the patches at:
Please not that he saw this in 3.1-rc10, too. And this version already
contains the fixes:
% git describe --contains 0030807c66f0582
v3.1-rc10~5^2
I just saw similar symptoms while running a weekly rsync backup job. The
machine was stuck for a few seconds several times during that time (no
response to mouse or keyboard input). It always recovered by itself
after a short while.
This is an example output of latencytop during the rsync run:
Cause Maximum Percentage
[xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag] 7847.0 msec 16.6 %
Fork() system call 7777.1 msec 25.5 %
Creating block layer request 5352.5 msec 18.1 %
[xfs_buf_iowait] 2000.4 msec 14.7 %
[down] 959.7 msec 2.0 %
Page fault 637.3 msec 1.4 %
[xfs_iunpin_wait] 557.4 msec 0.7 %
Unlinking file 66.8 msec 0.1 %
I also took some "perf timechart" recordings. If there is interest I
could post the svg images somewhere.
--
Markus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-21 20:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-20 22:42 XFS read hangs in 3.1-rc10 Simon Kirby
2011-10-20 22:42 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-21 13:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-21 13:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-21 20:28 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-21 20:28 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-24 8:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-24 8:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-25 20:07 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-25 20:07 ` Simon Kirby
2011-10-26 11:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-26 11:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-16 19:56 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-16 19:56 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-20 15:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-20 15:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-28 19:05 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-28 19:05 ` Simon Kirby
2011-11-28 19:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-28 19:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-28 21:01 ` Ben Myers
2011-11-28 21:01 ` Ben Myers
2011-10-21 20:29 ` Markus Trippelsdorf [this message]
2011-10-21 20:29 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
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=20111021202911.GA1633@x4.trippels.de \
--to=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sim@hostway.ca \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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.