linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
To: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
Cc: linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Chris Mason" <clm@fb.com>,
	miaox@cn.fujitsu.com, "Marc MERLIN" <marc@merlins.org>,
	Torbjørn <lists@skagestad.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: fix task hang under heavy compressed write
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:20:46 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140813152045.GA9273@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2364156.aMAqnATvIX@merkaba>

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 01:54:40PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 12. August 2014, 15:44:59 schrieb Liu Bo:
> > This has been reported and discussed for a long time, and this hang occurs
> > in both 3.15 and 3.16.
> 
> Liu, is this safe for testing yet?

Yes, I've confirmed that this hang doesn't occur by running my tests for 2
days(usually it hangs in 2 hours).

But...
As Chris said in the thread, this is more a workaround, there're other potential
issues that would lead to similar deadlock.

I'm trying to write a real fix instead of a workaround.

thanks,
-liubo

> 
> Thanks,
> Martin
> 
> > Btrfs now migrates to use kernel workqueue, but it introduces this hang
> > problem.
> > 
> > Btrfs has a kind of work queued as an ordered way, which means that its
> > ordered_func() must be processed in the way of FIFO, so it usually looks
> > like --
> > 
> > normal_work_helper(arg)
> >     work = container_of(arg, struct btrfs_work, normal_work);
> > 
> >     work->func() <---- (we name it work X)
> >     for ordered_work in wq->ordered_list
> >             ordered_work->ordered_func()
> >             ordered_work->ordered_free()
> > 
> > The hang is a rare case, first when we find free space, we get an uncached
> > block group, then we go to read its free space cache inode for free space
> > information, so it will
> > 
> > file a readahead request
> >     btrfs_readpages()
> >          for page that is not in page cache
> >                 __do_readpage()
> >                      submit_extent_page()
> >                            btrfs_submit_bio_hook()
> >                                  btrfs_bio_wq_end_io()
> >                                  submit_bio()
> >                                  end_workqueue_bio() <--(ret by the 1st
> > endio) queue a work(named work Y) for the 2nd also the real endio()
> > 
> > So the hang occurs when work Y's work_struct and work X's work_struct
> > happens to share the same address.
> > 
> > A bit more explanation,
> > 
> > A,B,C -- struct btrfs_work
> > arg   -- struct work_struct
> > 
> > kthread:
> > worker_thread()
> >     pick up a work_struct from @worklist
> >     process_one_work(arg)
> > 	worker->current_work = arg;  <-- arg is A->normal_work
> > 	worker->current_func(arg)
> > 		normal_work_helper(arg)
> > 		     A = container_of(arg, struct btrfs_work, normal_work);
> > 
> > 		     A->func()
> > 		     A->ordered_func()
> > 		     A->ordered_free()  <-- A gets freed
> > 
> > 		     B->ordered_func()
> > 			  submit_compressed_extents()
> > 			      find_free_extent()
> > 				  load_free_space_inode()
> > 				      ...   <-- (the above readhead stack)
> > 				      end_workqueue_bio()
> > 					   btrfs_queue_work(work C)
> > 		     B->ordered_free()
> > 
> > As if work A has a high priority in wq->ordered_list and there are more
> > ordered works queued after it, such as B->ordered_func(), its memory could
> > have been freed before normal_work_helper() returns, which means that
> > kernel workqueue code worker_thread() still has worker->current_work
> > pointer to be work A->normal_work's, ie. arg's address.
> > 
> > Meanwhile, work C is allocated after work A is freed, work C->normal_work
> > and work A->normal_work are likely to share the same address(I confirmed
> > this with ftrace output, so I'm not just guessing, it's rare though).
> > 
> > When another kthread picks up work C->normal_work to process, and finds our
> > kthread is processing it(see find_worker_executing_work()), it'll think
> > work C as a collision and skip then, which ends up nobody processing work C.
> > 
> > So the situation is that our kthread is waiting forever on work C.
> > 
> > The key point is that they shouldn't have the same address, so this defers
> > ->ordered_free() and does a batched free to avoid that.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/btrfs/async-thread.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c b/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
> > index 5a201d8..2ac01b3 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
> > @@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ static void run_ordered_work(struct __btrfs_workqueue
> > *wq) struct btrfs_work *work;
> >  	spinlock_t *lock = &wq->list_lock;
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> > +	LIST_HEAD(free_list);
> > 
> >  	while (1) {
> >  		spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags);
> > @@ -219,17 +220,24 @@ static void run_ordered_work(struct __btrfs_workqueue
> > *wq)
> > 
> >  		/* now take the lock again and drop our item from the list */
> >  		spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags);
> > -		list_del(&work->ordered_list);
> > +		list_move_tail(&work->ordered_list, &free_list);
> >  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags);
> > 
> >  		/*
> >  		 * we don't want to call the ordered free functions
> >  		 * with the lock held though
> >  		 */
> > +	}
> > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags);
> > +
> > +	while (!list_empty(&free_list)) {
> > +		work = list_entry(free_list.next, struct btrfs_work,
> > +				  ordered_list);
> > +
> > +		list_del(&work->ordered_list);
> >  		work->ordered_free(work);
> >  		trace_btrfs_all_work_done(work);
> >  	}
> > -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags);
> >  }
> > 
> >  static void normal_work_helper(struct work_struct *arg)
> 
> -- 
> Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
> GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-08-13 15:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-12  7:44 [PATCH] Btrfs: fix task hang under heavy compressed write Liu Bo
2014-08-12 14:35 ` [PATCH v2] " Liu Bo
2014-08-12 14:57 ` [PATCH] " Chris Mason
2014-08-13  0:53   ` Qu Wenruo
2014-08-13 11:54 ` Martin Steigerwald
2014-08-13 13:27   ` Rich Freeman
2014-08-13 15:20   ` Liu Bo [this message]
2014-08-14  9:27     ` Martin Steigerwald
2014-08-15 17:51       ` Martin Steigerwald
2014-08-15 15:36 ` [PATCH v3] " Liu Bo
2014-08-15 16:05   ` Chris Mason
2014-08-16  7:28   ` Miao Xie
2014-08-18  7:32     ` Liu Bo
2014-08-25 14:58   ` Chris Mason
2014-08-25 15:19     ` Liu Bo
2014-08-26 10:20     ` Martin Steigerwald
2014-08-26 10:38       ` Liu Bo
2014-08-26 12:04         ` Martin Steigerwald
2014-08-26 13:02       ` Chris Mason
2014-08-26 13:20         ` Martin Steigerwald
2014-08-31 11:48           ` Martin Steigerwald
2014-08-31 15:40             ` Liu Bo

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=20140813152045.GA9273@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
    --cc=Martin@lichtvoll.de \
    --cc=clm@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lists@skagestad.org \
    --cc=marc@merlins.org \
    --cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.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).