From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@samsung.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: running out of tags in 9P (was Re: [git pull] vfs part 2)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 10:42:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150703094210.GR17109@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55964593.1070507@samsung.com>
On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 11:19:31AM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
> On 07/02/2015 07:49 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 05:43:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> >> req->tc->tag = tag-1;
> >> + if (req->status != REQ_STATUS_IDLE)
> >> + pr_err("using tag %d with odd status (%d)", tag, req->status);
> >
> > Should be tag - 1 here, actually.
>
> So, with this change:
>
> [ 81.654695] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 2 already freed
> [ 81.655186] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 2]
> [ 85.014795] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 4 already freed
> [ 85.015753] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 4 already freed
> [ 85.016473] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 4 already freed
> [ 87.275842] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 5]
> [ 88.943223] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 4 already freed
> [ 88.943790] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 4 already freed
> [ 88.944320] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 4 already freed
> [ 88.945050] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 4]
> [ 105.551220] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 3 already freed
> [ 105.552065] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 3 already freed
> [ 114.528467] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 4 already freed
> [ 164.791295] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 2 already freed
> [ 164.792156] 9pnet: using tag 2 with odd status (4)
> [ 164.864398] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 4]
> [ 166.419993] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 3]
> [ 174.062625] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 3 already freed
> [ 174.063121] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 3 already freed
> [ 174.063637] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 3 already freed
> [ 174.064018] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 3 already freed
> [ 174.064547] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 3]
> [ 175.418729] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 3 already freed
> [ 177.911727] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 1]
> [ 235.748520] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 1 already freed
> [ 235.749595] 9pnet: using tag 1 with odd status (4)
> [ 243.496782] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 6 already freed
> [ 243.497697] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 6 already freed
> [ 243.499079] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 6]
> [ 243.736388] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 1 already freed
> [ 243.740019] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 1 already freed
> [ 248.337712] 9pnet: late delivery, tag 2 already freed
> [ 249.872950] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 9]
> [ 252.448858] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 8]
> [ 252.668878] 9pnet: mismatched reply [tag = 11]
FWIW, I'd reproduced it here as well. With the addition of checking in
p9_client_cb() whether the tag is already freed in IDR, reporting ->status
when it's not "sent" and reporting Tflush, I've got this:
[ 2754.713015] 9pnet: flushing 1
[ 2755.516123] 9pnet: flush 1 [3]done
[ 2758.443265] 9pnet: flushing 16
[ 2768.655768] 9pnet: flush 16 [8]done
[ 2783.939538] 9pnet: flushing 30
[ 2786.067856] 9pnet: flush 30 [3]done
[ 2809.784119] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] delivery in 0, tag 1
[ 2809.948681] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] using tag 1 with odd status (4)
Here we have delivery when that sucker is into p9_free_req(), but hasn't
removed from IDR yet.
[ 2809.948681] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] delivery in 0, tag 1
[ 2816.767861] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] using tag 1 with odd status (4)
Ditto.
[ 2816.767861] 9pnet: flushing 4
[ 2816.769484] 9pnet: flush 4 [5]done
[ 2846.327753] 9pnet: flushing 3
[ 2854.876131] 9pnet: flush 3 [4]done
[ 2856.492801] 9pnet: flushing 6
[ 2857.675642] 9pnet: flush 6 [1]done
[ 2860.051701] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] delivery in 0, tag 1
[ 2860.052941] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] late delivery, tag 1 already freed in IDR
[ 2860.680181] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] using tag 1 with odd status (4)
This has hit between p9_free_req() and reallocating that request.
[ 2909.911815] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] delivery in 4, tag 1
[ 2909.913145] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] late delivery, tag 1 already freed in IDR
... while _this_ one has raced with p9_free_req() in a different way.
[ 2910.852202] 9pnet: flushing 3
[ 2917.985941] 9pnet: flush 3 [4]done
[ 2937.600652] 9pnet: flushing 2
[ 2939.775354] 9pnet: flush 2 [4]done
[ 2961.521600] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] delivery in 0, tag 1
[ 2962.320383] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] using tag 1 with odd status (4)
Same at the very first one.
[ 2962.320383] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] delivery in 4, tag 8
[ 3001.578372] 9pnet: [ffff880113213000] delivery in 4, tag 6
Those had hit before p9_free_req().
AFAICS, we get occasional stray responses from somewhere. And no, it doesn't
seem to be related to flushes or to dropping chan->lock in req_done() (this
run had been with chan->lock taken on the outside of the loop).
What I really don't understand is WTF is it playing with p9_tag_lookup() -
it's stashing req->tc via virtqueue_add_sgs() opaque data argument, fetches
it back in req_done(), then picks ->tag from it and uses p9_tag_lookup() to
find req. Why not simply pass req instead? I had been wrong about that
p9_tag_lookup() being able to return NULL, but why bother with it at all?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-03 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-15 18:14 [git pull] vfs part 2 Al Viro
2015-04-23 10:16 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-05-25 8:30 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-06-21 21:12 ` Al Viro
2015-06-21 21:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-06-21 21:35 ` Al Viro
2015-06-22 12:02 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-01 6:27 ` Al Viro
2015-07-01 7:50 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-01 8:27 ` Al Viro
2015-07-01 8:41 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-01 8:55 ` Al Viro
2015-07-01 11:25 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-01 18:44 ` Al Viro
2015-07-02 3:20 ` Al Viro
2015-07-02 4:10 ` running out of tags in 9P (was Re: [git pull] vfs part 2) Al Viro
[not found] ` <20150702041046.GG17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-02 7:50 ` Andrey Ryabinin
[not found] ` <CAPAsAGzZVy3-D4J1ZGsUZU4RRQ36NtprZg_Uvfi5=46=1_rpWA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-02 7:59 ` Al Viro
2015-07-02 8:19 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-02 8:25 ` Al Viro
[not found] ` <20150702082529.GJ17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-02 8:42 ` Al Viro
[not found] ` <20150702084208.GK17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-02 12:19 ` Andrey Ryabinin
[not found] ` <55952C6D.50805-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-02 16:43 ` Al Viro
[not found] ` <20150702164332.GL17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-02 16:49 ` Al Viro
[not found] ` <20150702164926.GN17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-03 8:19 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-03 9:42 ` Al Viro [this message]
[not found] ` <20150703094210.GR17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-03 15:00 ` [PATCH] forgetting to cancel request in interrupted zero-copy 9P RPC " Al Viro
[not found] ` <20150703150000.GS17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-03 19:56 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-02 20:26 ` running out of tags in 9P " Andrey Ryabinin
[not found] ` <5594E5EB.4030808@samsung.com>
2015-07-02 7:50 ` Al Viro
2015-07-02 12:00 ` [git pull] vfs part 2 Jeff Layton
2015-07-02 12:07 ` Jeff Layton
2015-07-02 16:45 ` Al Viro
2015-07-02 17:01 ` Jeff Layton
2015-07-02 17:56 ` Dominique Martinet
2015-07-02 18:43 ` Al Viro
2015-07-02 21:00 ` Dominique Martinet
2015-07-02 18:59 ` Jeff Layton
2015-07-02 20:36 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2015-07-02 18:40 ` Al Viro
2015-07-02 19:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-07-02 20:44 ` Al Viro
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=20150703094210.GR17109@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=a.ryabinin@samsung.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).