From: Enrik Berkhan <Enrik.Berkhan@ge.com>
To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: possible ext4 related deadlock
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:49:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B754E5E.603@ge.com> (raw)
Hi,
currently we're experiencing some process hangs that seem to be
ext4-related. (Kernel 2.6.28.10-Blackfin, i.e. with Analog Devices
patches including some memory management changes for NOMMU.)
The situation is as follows:
We have two threads writing to an ext4-filesystem. After several hours
and accross about 20 systems there happens one hang where
(reconstructed from Alt-SysRq-W output):
1. pdflush waits in start_this_handle
2. kjournald2 waits in jdb2_journal_commit_transaction
3. thread 1 waits in start_this_handle
4. thread 2 waits in
ext4_da_write_begin
(start_this_handle succeeded)
grab_cache_page_write_begin
__alloc_pages_internal
try_to_free_pages
do_try_to_free_pages
congestion_wait
Actually, thread 2 shouldn't be completely blocked, because
congestion_wait has a timeout if I understand the code correctly.
Unfortunately, I pressed Alt-SysRq-W only once when having a chance to
reproduce the problem on a test system with console access.
When the system is in this state, some external event like telnet login
or killing a monitoring process in an older telnet sessin by pressing
Ctrl-C makes it continue to work normally. I suspect that this triggers
some memory freeing which allows thread 2 in the example above to get
some pages and continue running.
I had a look at all the recent ext4/jbd2 changes since about 2.6.28 but
couldn't identify anything that would solve this problem. But maybe I
just couldn't identify the right thing.
What I have noticed is that the order of start_this_handle and
grab_cache_page_write_begin has changed between ext3 and ext4:
ext3_write_begin:
...
page = grab_cache_page_write_begin(mapping, index, flags);
if (!page)
return -ENOMEM;
*pagep = page;
handle = ext3_journal_start(inode, needed_blocks);
...
ext4_{da_}_write_begin:
...
handle = ext4_journal_start(inode, needed_blocks);
if (IS_ERR(handle)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(handle);
goto out;
}
/* We cannot recurse into the filesystem as the transaction is already
* started */
flags |= AOP_FLAG_NOFS;
page = grab_cache_page_write_begin(mapping, index, flags);
...
As I understand the change of the order requires the AOP_FLAG_NOFS in
the ext4 code.
Might this be the reason for the deadlock? Would it be worth trying to
change the order back or is there a very good reason for the change
between ext3 and ext4?
Or am I looking in a completely wrong place?
Any help would be appreciated.
Enrik
next reply other threads:[~2010-02-12 12:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-12 12:49 Enrik Berkhan [this message]
2010-02-18 1:55 ` possible ext4 related deadlock Jan Kara
2010-03-05 13:56 ` Enrik Berkhan
2010-03-05 15:45 ` tytso
2010-03-10 16:23 ` Enrik Berkhan
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=4B754E5E.603@ge.com \
--to=enrik.berkhan@ge.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
/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.