From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.0 517/862] sbitmap: Avoid leaving waitqueue in invalid state in __sbq_wake_up()
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9edd6656-e1af-e1fa-123a-115c3ba7b1ae@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221019083312.840347737@linuxfoundation.org>
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
>
> [ Upstream commit 48c033314f372478548203c583529f53080fd078 ]
>
> When __sbq_wake_up() decrements wait_cnt to 0 but races with someone
> else waking the waiter on the waitqueue (so the waitqueue becomes
> empty), it exits without reseting wait_cnt to wake_batch number. Once
> wait_cnt is 0, nobody will ever reset the wait_cnt or wake the new
> waiters resulting in possible deadlocks or busyloops. Fix the problem by
> making sure we reset wait_cnt even if we didn't wake up anybody in the
> end.
>
> Fixes: 040b83fcecfb ("sbitmap: fix possible io hung due to lost wakeup")
> Reported-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220908130937.2795-1-jack@suse.cz
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
I have no authority on linux-block, but I'll say NAK to this one
(and 479/862), and let Jens and Jan overrule me if they disagree.
This was another of several 6.1-rc1 commits which had given me lost
wakeups never suffered before; was not tagged Cc stable; and (unless I've
missed it on lore) never had AUTOSEL posted to linux-block or linux-kernel.
Hugh
> ---
> lib/sbitmap.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/sbitmap.c b/lib/sbitmap.c
> index 1f31147872e6..bb1970ad4875 100644
> --- a/lib/sbitmap.c
> +++ b/lib/sbitmap.c
> @@ -605,6 +605,7 @@ static bool __sbq_wake_up(struct sbitmap_queue *sbq)
> struct sbq_wait_state *ws;
> unsigned int wake_batch;
> int wait_cnt;
> + bool ret;
>
> ws = sbq_wake_ptr(sbq);
> if (!ws)
> @@ -615,12 +616,23 @@ static bool __sbq_wake_up(struct sbitmap_queue *sbq)
> * For concurrent callers of this, callers should call this function
> * again to wakeup a new batch on a different 'ws'.
> */
> - if (wait_cnt < 0 || !waitqueue_active(&ws->wait))
> + if (wait_cnt < 0)
> return true;
>
> + /*
> + * If we decremented queue without waiters, retry to avoid lost
> + * wakeups.
> + */
> if (wait_cnt > 0)
> - return false;
> + return !waitqueue_active(&ws->wait);
>
> + /*
> + * When wait_cnt == 0, we have to be particularly careful as we are
> + * responsible to reset wait_cnt regardless whether we've actually
> + * woken up anybody. But in case we didn't wakeup anybody, we still
> + * need to retry.
> + */
> + ret = !waitqueue_active(&ws->wait);
> wake_batch = READ_ONCE(sbq->wake_batch);
>
> /*
> @@ -649,7 +661,7 @@ static bool __sbq_wake_up(struct sbitmap_queue *sbq)
> sbq_index_atomic_inc(&sbq->wake_index);
> atomic_set(&ws->wait_cnt, wake_batch);
>
> - return false;
> + return ret;
> }
>
> void sbitmap_queue_wake_up(struct sbitmap_queue *sbq)
> --
> 2.35.1
>
>
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-19 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20221019083249.951566199@linuxfoundation.org>
[not found] ` <20221019083311.114449669@linuxfoundation.org>
2022-10-19 15:06 ` [PATCH 6.0 479/862] sbitmap: fix possible io hung due to lost wakeup Hugh Dickins
2022-10-19 17:25 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-10-19 17:37 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] ` <20221019083312.840347737@linuxfoundation.org>
2022-10-19 15:08 ` Hugh Dickins [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=9edd6656-e1af-e1fa-123a-115c3ba7b1ae@google.com \
--to=hughd@google.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox