From: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>
To: tytso@mit.edu, jack@suse.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] jbd2: bound j_list_lock hold time in the checkpoint shrinker
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 12:22:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260713102229.1598812-1-max.kellermann@ionos.com> (raw)
We hit recurring RCU stalls / soft lockups on a busy ext4 filesystem
that serves as the CacheFiles backing store for a Ceph (fscache)
client. The stall is always the journal commit thread spinning on
journal->j_list_lock:
rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
rcu: 106-....: (2099 ticks this GP) ... (t=2100 jiffies)
CPU: 106 Comm: jbd2/nvme1n1p1-
RIP: 0010:queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x20a/0x240
Call Trace:
jbd2_journal_write_metadata_buffer+0x1c0/0x310
jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x5e2/0x16e0
kjournald2+0xa1/0x220
kthread+0xe4/0x1d0
kjournald2 has already passed the "wait for outstanding handles"
barrier and is in the metadata write-out loop; it is simply unable to
acquire j_list_lock for >21s. The lock holder is the jbd2 checkpoint
shrinker.
Under memory pressure, the shrinker (jbd2_journal_shrink_scan ->
jbd2_journal_shrink_checkpoint_list -> journal_shrink_one_cp_list)
walks a transaction's checkpoint list under j_list_lock. On this
workload, the lists are large and dominated by busy buffers (dirty /
under writeback / attached to the running transaction), and
journal_shrink_one_cp_list() can therefore hold j_list_lock for a time
proportional to the whole list length, for two reasons:
1. The JBD2_SHRINK_BUSY_SKIP path uses "continue", which also skips
the need_resched() check, so the scan does not yield even when a
reschedule is pending.
2. The scan budget (nr_to_scan) is decremented only for buffers that
are actually freed, so busy buffers do not consume it and the loop
is not bounded by the shrinker's batch at all.
Both were introduced by commit b98dba273a0e ("jbd2: remove
journal_clean_one_cp_list()"), which folded
journal_clean_one_cp_list() into journal_shrink_one_cp_list() and
dropped the per-examined-buffer budget that the shrinker previously
had.
The result is a self-reinforcing collapse: shrinker instances across
many CPUs hold/contend j_list_lock, kjournald2 cannot commit, the
journal fills, CacheFiles lookups block in ext4, fscache cookies get
stuck in LOOKING_UP, and netfs I/O times out.
Max Kellermann (2):
jbd2: check need_resched() when skipping busy checkpoint buffers
jbd2: bound shrinker scans by examined checkpoint buffers
fs/jbd2/checkpoint.c | 28 +++++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
--
2.47.3
next reply other threads:[~2026-07-13 10:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-13 10:22 Max Kellermann [this message]
2026-07-13 10:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] jbd2: check need_resched() when skipping busy checkpoint buffers Max Kellermann
2026-07-13 12:16 ` Jan Kara
2026-07-14 6:26 ` Zhang Yi
2026-07-13 10:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] jbd2: bound shrinker scans by examined " Max Kellermann
2026-07-13 12:24 ` Jan Kara
2026-07-14 6:53 ` Zhang Yi
2026-07-13 12:53 ` [PATCH 0/2] jbd2: bound j_list_lock hold time in the checkpoint shrinker Zhang Yi
2026-07-13 15:03 ` Max Kellermann
2026-07-14 3:41 ` Zhang Yi
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=20260713102229.1598812-1-max.kellermann@ionos.com \
--to=max.kellermann@ionos.com \
--cc=jack@suse.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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