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
next prev 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