From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.0 479/862] sbitmap: fix possible io hung due to lost wakeup
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 19:25:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y1AzCuwWxEPoYGRr@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <174a196-5473-4e93-a52a-5e26eb37949@google.com>
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 08:06:26AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
> > From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
> >
> > [ Upstream commit 040b83fcecfb86f3225d3a5de7fd9b3fbccf83b4 ]
> >
> > There are two problems can lead to lost wakeup:
> >
> > 1) invalid wakeup on the wrong waitqueue:
> >
> > For example, 2 * wake_batch tags are put, while only wake_batch threads
> > are woken:
> >
> > __sbq_wake_up
> > atomic_cmpxchg -> reset wait_cnt
> > __sbq_wake_up -> decrease wait_cnt
> > ...
> > __sbq_wake_up -> wait_cnt is decreased to 0 again
> > atomic_cmpxchg
> > sbq_index_atomic_inc -> increase wake_index
> > wake_up_nr -> wake up and waitqueue might be empty
> > sbq_index_atomic_inc -> increase again, one waitqueue is skipped
> > wake_up_nr -> invalid wake up because old wakequeue might be empty
> >
> > To fix the problem, increasing 'wake_index' before resetting 'wait_cnt'.
> >
> > 2) 'wait_cnt' can be decreased while waitqueue is empty
> >
> > As pointed out by Jan Kara, following race is possible:
> >
> > CPU1 CPU2
> > __sbq_wake_up __sbq_wake_up
> > sbq_wake_ptr() sbq_wake_ptr() -> the same
> > wait_cnt = atomic_dec_return()
> > /* decreased to 0 */
> > sbq_index_atomic_inc()
> > /* move to next waitqueue */
> > atomic_set()
> > /* reset wait_cnt */
> > wake_up_nr()
> > /* wake up on the old waitqueue */
> > wait_cnt = atomic_dec_return()
> > /*
> > * decrease wait_cnt in the old
> > * waitqueue, while it can be
> > * empty.
> > */
> >
> > Fix the problem by waking up before updating 'wake_index' and
> > 'wait_cnt'.
> >
> > With this patch, noted that 'wait_cnt' is still decreased in the old
> > empty waitqueue, however, the wakeup is redirected to a active waitqueue,
> > and the extra decrement on the old empty waitqueue is not handled.
> >
> > Fixes: 88459642cba4 ("blk-mq: abstract tag allocation out into sbitmap library")
> > Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220803121504.212071-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com
> > 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 517/862), and let Jens and Jan overrule me if they disagree.
>
> This was the first 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.
Ok, thanks for the review. I'll drop both of the sbitmap.c changes and
if people report issues and want them back, I'll be glad to revisit them
then.
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-19 17:25 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 [this message]
2022-10-19 17:37 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] ` <20221019083312.840347737@linuxfoundation.org>
2022-10-19 15:08 ` [PATCH 6.0 517/862] sbitmap: Avoid leaving waitqueue in invalid state in __sbq_wake_up() Hugh Dickins
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=Y1AzCuwWxEPoYGRr@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.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