From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: iomap: writeback ioend/bio allocation deadlock risk
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 09:17:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210521071727.GA11473@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YKcouuVR/y/L4T58@T590>
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 11:27:54AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> if %__gfp_direct_reclaim is set then bio_alloc will always be able to
> allocate a bio. this is due to the mempool guarantees. to make this work,
> callers must never allocate more than 1 bio at a time from the general pool.
> callers that need to allocate more than 1 bio must always submit the
> previously allocated bio for io before attempting to allocate a new one.
> failure to do so can cause deadlocks under memory pressure.
>
> 1) more than one ioends can be allocated from 'iomap_ioend_bioset'
> before submitting them all, so mempoll guarantee can't be made, which can
> be observed frequently in writeback over ext4
>
> 2) more than one chained bio(allocated from fs_bio_set) via iomap_chain_bio,
> which is easy observed when writing big files on XFS:
The comment describing bio_alloc_bioset is actually wrong. Allocating
more than 1 at a time is perfectly fine, it just can't be more than
the pool_size argument passed to bioset_init.
iomap_ioend_bioset is sized to make sure we can always complete up
to 4 pages, and the list is only used inside a page, so we're fine.
fs_bio_set always has two entries to allow exactly for the common
chain and submit pattern.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-21 7:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-21 3:27 iomap: writeback ioend/bio allocation deadlock risk Ming Lei
2021-05-21 7:17 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2021-05-21 7:31 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-21 7:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-21 8:35 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-21 8:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-21 8:54 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-24 15:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-24 23:55 ` Dave Chinner
2021-05-25 4:54 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-25 6:28 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-25 8:21 ` Dave Chinner
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=20210521071727.GA11473@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.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.