From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix a potential deadlock in __ext4_es_shrink()
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 15:00:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140713070014.GA9301@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1405193603-15614-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu>
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 03:33:23PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> This fixes the following lockdep complaint:
>
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 3.16.0-rc2-mm1+ #7 Tainted: G O
> -------------------------------------------------------
> kworker/u24:0/4356 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&(&sbi->s_es_lru_lock)->rlock){+.+.-.}, at: [<ffffffff81285fff>] __ext4_es_shrink+0x4f/0x2e0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&ei->i_es_lock){++++-.}, at: [<ffffffff81286961>] ext4_es_insert_extent+0x71/0x180
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> ---- ----
> lock(&ei->i_es_lock);
> lock(&(&sbi->s_es_lru_lock)->rlock);
> lock(&ei->i_es_lock);
> lock(&(&sbi->s_es_lru_lock)->rlock);
>
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> 6 locks held by kworker/u24:0/4356:
> #0: ("writeback"){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff81071d00>] process_one_work+0x180/0x560
> #1: ((&(&wb->dwork)->work)){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81071d00>] process_one_work+0x180/0x560
> #2: (&type->s_umount_key#22){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff811a9c74>] grab_super_passive+0x44/0x90
> #3: (jbd2_handle){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812979f9>] start_this_handle+0x189/0x5f0
> #4: (&ei->i_data_sem){++++..}, at: [<ffffffff81247062>] ext4_map_blocks+0x132/0x550
> #5: (&ei->i_es_lock){++++-.}, at: [<ffffffff81286961>] ext4_es_insert_extent+0x71/0x180
>
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 0 PID: 4356 Comm: kworker/u24:0 Tainted: G O 3.16.0-rc2-mm1+ #7
> Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011
> Workqueue: writeback bdi_writeback_workfn (flush-253:0)
> ffffffff8213dce0 ffff880014b07538 ffffffff815df0bb 0000000000000007
> ffffffff8213e040 ffff880014b07588 ffffffff815db3dd ffff880014b07568
> ffff880014b07610 ffff88003b868930 ffff88003b868908 ffff88003b868930
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff815df0bb>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x68
> [<ffffffff815db3dd>] print_circular_bug+0x1fb/0x20c
> [<ffffffff810a7a3e>] __lock_acquire+0x163e/0x1d00
> [<ffffffff815e89dc>] ? retint_restore_args+0xe/0xe
> [<ffffffff815ddc7b>] ? __slab_alloc+0x4a8/0x4ce
> [<ffffffff81285fff>] ? __ext4_es_shrink+0x4f/0x2e0
> [<ffffffff810a8707>] lock_acquire+0x87/0x120
> [<ffffffff81285fff>] ? __ext4_es_shrink+0x4f/0x2e0
> [<ffffffff8128592d>] ? ext4_es_free_extent+0x5d/0x70
> [<ffffffff815e6f09>] _raw_spin_lock+0x39/0x50
> [<ffffffff81285fff>] ? __ext4_es_shrink+0x4f/0x2e0
> [<ffffffff8119760b>] ? kmem_cache_alloc+0x18b/0x1a0
> [<ffffffff81285fff>] __ext4_es_shrink+0x4f/0x2e0
> [<ffffffff812869b8>] ext4_es_insert_extent+0xc8/0x180
> [<ffffffff812470f4>] ext4_map_blocks+0x1c4/0x550
> [<ffffffff8124c4c4>] ext4_writepages+0x6d4/0xd00
> ...
>
> Reported-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
> Reported-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
Thanks for fixing this. It looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
I will pick it up into my patch set for improving es shrinker and look
at whether or not it can reduce the latency.
Thanks,
- Zheng
> ---
> fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> index 3f5c188..0b7e28e 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> @@ -966,10 +966,10 @@ retry:
> continue;
> }
>
> - if (ei->i_es_lru_nr == 0 || ei == locked_ei)
> + if (ei->i_es_lru_nr == 0 || ei == locked_ei ||
> + !write_trylock(&ei->i_es_lock))
> continue;
>
> - write_lock(&ei->i_es_lock);
> shrunk = __es_try_to_reclaim_extents(ei, nr_to_scan);
> if (ei->i_es_lru_nr == 0)
> list_del_init(&ei->i_es_lru);
> --
> 2.0.0
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-13 7:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-07 23:33 ext4: lockdep splash Minchan Kim
2014-07-12 19:33 ` [PATCH] ext4: fix a potential deadlock in __ext4_es_shrink() Theodore Ts'o
2014-07-13 7:00 ` Zheng Liu [this message]
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=20140713070014.GA9301@gmail.com \
--to=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--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.