linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>
To: linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Cc: hch@lst.de, ming.lei@redhat.com, dlemoal@kernel.org,
	axboe@kernel.dk, gjoyce@ibm.com
Subject: [PATCHv2 0/6] block: fix lock order and remove redundant locking
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 13:58:53 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250218082908.265283-1-nilay@linux.ibm.com> (raw)

Hi,

After we modeled the freeze & enter queue as lock for supporting lockdep
under commit f1be1788a32e ("block: model freeze & enter queue as lock
for supporting lockdep"), we received numerous lockdep splats. And one
of those splats[1] reported the potential deadlock due to incorrect lock
ordering issue between q->sysfs-lock and q->q_usage_counter. So some of 
the patches in this series are aimed to cut the dependency between q->
sysfs-lock and q->q_usage_counter.

This patchset contains six patches in the series.

The 1st patch removes the q->sysfs_lock for all sysfs attributes which
don't need it. We identified all sysfs attributes which don't need any 
locking and all such attributes have been now grouped in queue_attr_show
/queue_attr_store under entry->show_nolock/entry->store_nolock methods.

The 2nd patch helps acquire q->limits_lock instead of q->sysfs_lock while
reading a set of attributes whose write method is protected with atomic
limit update APIs or updates to these attributes could occur under atomic 
limit update APIs such as queue_limit_start_update() and queue_limits_
commit_update(). So all such attributes have been now grouped in queue_
attr_show under entry->show_limit method.

Subsequent patches address remaining attributes individually and group
them in queue_attr_show/queue_attr_store under entry->show/entry->store 
method which require some form of locking other than q->limits_lock or 
q->sysfs_lock.

The 3rd patch introduce a new dedicated lock for elevator switch/update
and thus eliminates the dependecy of sched update on q->sysfs_lock.

The 4th patch protects sysfs attribute nr_requests using q->elevator_lock
instead of q->sysfs_lock as the update to q->nr_requests now happen under
q->elevator_lock.

Similarly, the 5th patch protects sysfs attribute wbt_lat_usec using
q->elevator_lock instead of q->sysfs_lock as the update to wbt state and
latency now happen under q->elevator_lock.

The 6th patch protects read_ahead_kb using q->limits_lock instead of
q->sysfs_lock as update to bdi->ra_pages could happen using atomic limit
update APIs. Ideally we should have grouped this attribute in queue_attr_
show/queue_attr_store under entry->show_limit/entry->store_limit method. 
However we don't use atomic update helper APIs queue_limits_start_update() 
and queue_limits_commit_update() here bacause blk_apply_bdi_limits() which 
is invoked from queue_limits_commit_update() can overwrite the bdi->ra_
pages value which user actaully wants to store using this attribute. The 
blk_apply_bdi_limits() sets value of bdi->ra_pages based on the optimal 
I/O size(io_opt). So we choose instead to update this attribute value 
outside of using atomic limit update APIs.

Please note that above changes were unit tested against blktests and
quick xfstests with lockdep enabled.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/67637e70.050a0220.3157ee.000c.GAE@google.com/

Nilay Shroff (6):
  blk-sysfs: remove q->sysfs_lock for attributes which don't need it
  blk-sysfs: acquire q->limits_lock while reading attributes
  block: Introduce a dedicated lock for protecting queue elevator
    updates
  blk-sysfs: protect nr_requests update using q->elevator_lock
  blk-sysfs: protect wbt_lat_usec using q->elevator_lock
  blk-sysfs: protect read_ahead_kb using q->limits_lock

---
Changes from v1:
  - Audit all sysfs attributes in block layer and find attributes which
    don't need any locking as well as attributes which needs some form of
    locking; then remove locking from queue_attr_store/queue_attr_show and
    move it into the attributes that still need it in some form, followed
    by replacing it with the more suitable locks (hch)

  - Use dedicated lock for elevator switch/update (Ming Lei)

  - Re-arrange patchset to first segregate and group together all
    attributes which don't need locking followed by grouping attributes
    which need some form of locking.

Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250205144506.663819-1-nilay@linux.ibm.com/
---

 block/blk-core.c       |   1 +
 block/blk-mq.c         |  12 +-
 block/blk-settings.c   |   2 +-
 block/blk-sysfs.c      | 324 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 block/elevator.c       |  18 ++-
 block/genhd.c          |   9 +-
 include/linux/blkdev.h |   1 +
 7 files changed, 254 insertions(+), 113 deletions(-)

--
2.47.1


             reply	other threads:[~2025-02-18  8:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-18  8:28 Nilay Shroff [this message]
2025-02-18  8:28 ` [PATCHv2 1/6] blk-sysfs: remove q->sysfs_lock for attributes which don't need it Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  8:46   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-18 11:26     ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-21 14:02       ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-22 12:44         ` Ming Lei
2025-02-24 13:09           ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-24 14:49           ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-26 12:09             ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-24  8:41         ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-02-24 13:12           ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18 12:10   ` Ming Lei
2025-02-18 13:11     ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18 13:45       ` Ming Lei
2025-02-18 16:29         ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-19  3:24           ` Ming Lei
2025-02-19  5:42             ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-19  8:34             ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-19  8:56               ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-19  9:20                 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-18  8:28 ` [PATCHv2 2/6] blk-sysfs: acquire q->limits_lock while reading attributes Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  8:46   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-18  8:28 ` [PATCHv2 3/6] block: Introduce a dedicated lock for protecting queue elevator updates Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  9:05   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-18 11:14     ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18 16:32       ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-19  8:41         ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  8:28 ` [PATCHv2 4/6] blk-sysfs: protect nr_requests update using q->elevator_lock Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  8:28 ` [PATCHv2 5/6] blk-sysfs: protect wbt_lat_usec " Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  8:28 ` [PATCHv2 6/6] blk-sysfs: protect read_ahead_kb using q->limits_lock Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  9:12   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-18 11:27     ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-18  9:21 ` [PATCHv2 0/6] block: fix lock order and remove redundant locking Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-18 12:09   ` Nilay Shroff

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=20250218082908.265283-1-nilay@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=gjoyce@ibm.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).