Re: DIO process stuck apparently due to dioread_nolock (3.0)

[Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>]

12.08.2011 06:46, Jiaying Zhang wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> Could you try your test with the patch I just posted:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=131311627101278&w=2
> and see whether it fixes the problem?

No it does not.  I'm now able to trigger it more or
less reliable - I need to decompress a relatively
small (about 70Gb) oracle database and try to start
it (this requires a rebuild of initrd and reboot ofcourse --
whole thing takes about 15 minutes) - and I see this:

[  945.729965] EXT4-fs (sda11): Unaligned AIO/DIO on inode 5767175 by oracle; performance will be poor.
[  960.915602] SysRq : Show Blocked State
[  960.915650]   task                        PC stack   pid father
[  960.915852] oracle          D 0000000000000000     0  4985      1 0x00000000
[  960.915909]  ffff88103e627040 0000000000000082 ffff881000000000 ffff881078e3f7d0
[  960.917855]  ffff88103f88ffd8 ffff88103f88ffd8 ffff88103f88ffd8 ffff88103e627040
[  960.917953]  0000000001c08400 ffff88203e98c948 ffff88207873e240 ffffffff813527c6
[  960.918045] Call Trace:
[  960.918092]  [<ffffffff813527c6>] ? printk+0x43/0x48
[  960.918153]  [<ffffffffa01432a8>] ? ext4_msg+0x58/0x60 [ext4]
[  960.918201]  [<ffffffffa0123e6d>] ? ext4_file_write+0x20d/0x260 [ext4]
[  960.918252]  [<ffffffff8106aee0>] ? abort_exclusive_wait+0xb0/0xb0
[  960.918301]  [<ffffffffa0123c60>] ? ext4_llseek+0x120/0x120 [ext4]
[  960.918348]  [<ffffffff81162173>] ? aio_rw_vect_retry+0x73/0x1d0
[  960.918392]  [<ffffffff8116302f>] ? aio_run_iocb+0x5f/0x160
[  960.918436]  [<ffffffff81164258>] ? do_io_submit+0x4f8/0x600
[  960.918483]  [<ffffffff81359b52>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

(Inum 5767175 is one of oracle redologs).

Jan, I lied to you initially - I didn't even test your first patch,
because I loaded the wrong initrd.  With it applied, situation does
not improve still, and it looks exactly the same as with this new
patch by Jiaying Zhang:

[  415.288104] EXT4-fs (sda11): Unaligned AIO/DIO on inode 5767177 by oracle; performance will be poor.
[  422.967323] SysRq : Show Blocked State
[  422.967494]   task                        PC stack   pid father
[  422.967872] oracle          D 0000000000000000     0  3743      1 0x00000000
[  422.968112]  ffff88203e5a2810 0000000000000086 ffff882000000000 ffff88103f403080
[  422.968505]  ffff88203eeddfd8 ffff88203eeddfd8 ffff88203eeddfd8 ffff88203e5a2810
[  422.968895]  0000000001c08400 ffff88103f3db348 ffff88103f2fe800 ffffffff813527c6
[  422.969287] Call Trace:
[  422.969397]  [<ffffffff813527c6>] ? printk+0x43/0x48
[  422.969528]  [<ffffffffa0143288>] ? ext4_msg+0x58/0x60 [ext4]
[  422.969643]  [<ffffffffa0123e6d>] ? ext4_file_write+0x20d/0x260 [ext4]
[  422.969758]  [<ffffffff8106aee0>] ? abort_exclusive_wait+0xb0/0xb0
[  422.969873]  [<ffffffffa0123c60>] ? ext4_llseek+0x120/0x120 [ext4]
[  422.969985]  [<ffffffff81162173>] ? aio_rw_vect_retry+0x73/0x1d0
[  422.970093]  [<ffffffff8116302f>] ? aio_run_iocb+0x5f/0x160
[  422.970200]  [<ffffffff81164258>] ? do_io_submit+0x4f8/0x600
[  422.970312]  [<ffffffff81359b52>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

Note in both this cases, I now see slightly different
backtrace -- both mentions ext4_llseek and abort_exclusive_wait,
but the rest is different:

>> [   76.982985] EXT4-fs (dm-1): Unaligned AIO/DIO on inode 3407879 by oracle; performance will be poor.
>> [ 1469.734114] SysRq : Show Blocked State
>> [ 1469.734157]   task                        PC stack   pid father
>> [ 1469.734473] oracle          D 0000000000000000     0  6146      1 0x00000000
>> [ 1469.734525]  ffff88103f604810 0000000000000082 ffff881000000000 ffff881079791040
>> [ 1469.734603]  ffff880432c19fd8 ffff880432c19fd8 ffff880432c19fd8 ffff88103f604810
>> [ 1469.734681]  ffffea000ec13590 ffffffff00000000 ffff881438c8dad8 ffffffff810eeda2
>> [ 1469.734760] Call Trace:
>> [ 1469.734800]  [<ffffffff810eeda2>] ? __do_fault+0x422/0x520
>> [ 1469.734863]  [<ffffffffa0123e6d>] ? ext4_file_write+0x20d/0x260 [ext4]
>> [ 1469.734909]  [<ffffffff8106aee0>] ? abort_exclusive_wait+0xb0/0xb0
>> [ 1469.734956]  [<ffffffffa0123c60>] ? ext4_llseek+0x120/0x120 [ext4]
>> [ 1469.734999]  [<ffffffff81162173>] ? aio_rw_vect_retry+0x73/0x1d0
>> [ 1469.735039]  [<ffffffff8116302f>] ? aio_run_iocb+0x5f/0x160
>> [ 1469.735078]  [<ffffffff81164258>] ? do_io_submit+0x4f8/0x600
>> [ 1469.735122]  [<ffffffff81359b52>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

As Jan already pointed out, this place looks bogus, and
the same can be said about the new backtrace.  So I wonder
if there's some stack corruption going on there as well.

Btw, does ext4_llseek() look sane here?  Note it's called from
aio_submit() -- does it _ever_ implement SEEKs?

Maybe some debugging is neecessary here?

Thank you!

/mjt