public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, kch@nvidia.com,
	shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com, hch@lst.de, gjoyce@ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] block: blk-rq-qos: replace static key with atomic bitop
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 21:42:12 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJC4tDUsk42Nb9Df@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250804122125.3271397-1-nilay@linux.ibm.com>

On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 05:51:09PM +0530, Nilay Shroff wrote:
> This patchset replaces the use of a static key in the I/O path (rq_qos_
> xxx()) with an atomic queue flag (QUEUE_FLAG_QOS_ENABLED). This change
> is made to eliminate a potential deadlock introduced by the use of static
> keys in the blk-rq-qos infrastructure, as reported by lockdep during 
> blktests block/005[1].
> 
> The original static key approach was introduced to avoid unnecessary
> dereferencing of q->rq_qos when no blk-rq-qos module (e.g., blk-wbt or
> blk-iolatency) is configured. While efficient, enabling a static key at
> runtime requires taking cpu_hotplug_lock and jump_label_mutex, which 
> becomes problematic if the queue is already frozen — causing a reverse
> dependency on ->freeze_lock. This results in a lockdep splat indicating
> a potential deadlock.
> 
> To resolve this, we now gate q->rq_qos access with a q->queue_flags
> bitop (QUEUE_FLAG_QOS_ENABLED), avoiding the static key and the associated
> locking altogether.
> 
> I compared both static key and atomic bitop implementations using ftrace
> function graph tracer over ~50 invocations of rq_qos_issue() while ensuring
> blk-wbt/blk-iolatency were disabled (i.e., no QoS functionality). For
> easy comparision, I made rq_qos_issue() noinline. The comparision was
> made on PowerPC machine.
> 
> Static Key (disabled : QoS is not configured):
> 5d0: 00 00 00 60     nop    # patched in by static key framework (not taken)
> 5d4: 20 00 80 4e     blr    # return (branch to link register)
> 
> Only a nop and blr (branch to link register) are executed — very lightweight.
> 
> atomic bitop (QoS is not configured):
> 5d0: 20 00 23 e9     ld      r9,32(r3)     # load q->queue_flags
> 5d4: 00 80 29 71     andi.   r9,r9,32768   # check QUEUE_FLAG_QOS_ENABLED (bit 15)
> 5d8: 20 00 82 4d     beqlr                 # return if bit not set
> 
> This performs an ld and and andi. before returning. Slightly more work, 
> but q->queue_flags is typically hot in cache during I/O submission.
> 
> With Static Key (disabled):
> Duration (us): min=0.668 max=0.816 avg≈0.750
> 
> With atomic bitop QUEUE_FLAG_QOS_ENABLED (bit not set):
> Duration (us): min=0.684 max=0.834 avg≈0.759
> 
> As expected, both versions are almost similar in cost. The added latency
> from an extra ld and andi. is in the range of ~9ns.
> 
> There're two patches in the series. The first patch replaces static key
> with QUEUE_FLAG_QOS_ENABLED. The second patch ensures that we disable
> the QUEUE_FLAG_QOS_ENABLED when the queue no longer has any associated
> rq_qos policies.
> 
> As usual, feedback and review comments are welcome!
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/4fdm37so3o4xricdgfosgmohn63aa7wj3ua4e5vpihoamwg3ui@fq42f5q5t5ic/


Another approach is to call memalloc_noio_save() in cpu hotplug code...


Thanks,
Ming


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-08-04 13:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-04 12:21 [PATCH 0/2] block: blk-rq-qos: replace static key with atomic bitop Nilay Shroff
2025-08-04 12:21 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: avoid cpu_hotplug_lock depedency on freeze_lock Nilay Shroff
2025-08-04 12:21 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: clear QUEUE_FLAG_QOS_ENABLED in rq_qos_del() Nilay Shroff
2025-08-04 13:42 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2025-08-05  4:58   ` [PATCH 0/2] block: blk-rq-qos: replace static key with atomic bitop Nilay Shroff
2025-08-05 12:44     ` Ming Lei
2025-08-05 17:05       ` Nilay Shroff
2025-08-06  7:21         ` Ming Lei
2025-08-06  1:28     ` Jens Axboe
2025-08-06  1:44       ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-13 11:20         ` Nilay Shroff
2025-08-13 12:16           ` Jens Axboe
2025-08-13 15:01             ` Nilay Shroff
2025-08-06  5:13       ` Nilay Shroff
2025-08-05  9:28 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-05 12:14   ` 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=aJC4tDUsk42Nb9Df@fedora \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=gjoyce@ibm.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kch@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.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