From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
tytso@mit.edu, chris.mason@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com,
hch@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz,
yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com, richard@rsk.demon.co.uk,
damien.wyart@free.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v9
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 19:07:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A200846.5050109@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1243511204-2328-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Jens Axboe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's the 9th version of the writeback patches. Changes since v8:
>
> - Fix a bdi_work on-stack allocation hang. I hope this fixes Ted's
> issue.
> - Get rid of the explicit wait queues, we can just use wake_up_process()
> since it's just for that one task.
> - Add separate "sync_supers" thread that makes sure that the dirty
> super blocks get written. We cannot safely do this from bdi_forker_task(),
> as that risks deadlocking on ->s_umount. Artem, I implemented this
> by doing the wake ups from a timer so that it would be easier for you
> to just deactivate the timer when there are no super blocks.
>
> For ease of patching, I've put the full diff here:
>
> http://kernel.dk/writeback-v9.patch
>
> and also stored this in a writeback-v9 branch that will not change,
> you can pull that into Linus tree from here:
>
> git://git.kernel.dk/linux-2.6-block.git writeback-v9
I'm working with the above branch. Got the following twice.
Not sure what triggers this, probably if I do nothing and
cpufreq starts doing its magic, this is triggered.
And I'm not sure it has something to do with your changes,
it is just that I saw this only with your tree. Please,
ignore if this is not relevant.
=======================================================
scaling: [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.30-rc7-block-2.6 #1
-------------------------------------------------------
K99cpuspeed/9923 is trying to acquire lock:
(&(&dbs_info->work)->work){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff81051155>] __cancel_work_timer+0xd9/0x21d
but task is already holding lock:
(dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa0073aa8>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x23c/0x2cc [cpufreq_ondemand]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}:
[<ffffffff81063529>] __lock_acquire+0xa63/0xbeb
[<ffffffff8106379f>] lock_acquire+0xee/0x112
[<ffffffff812f4eb0>] __mutex_lock_common+0x5a/0x419
[<ffffffff812f5309>] mutex_lock_nested+0x30/0x35
[<ffffffffa00738f2>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x86/0x2cc [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff8125eaa4>] __cpufreq_governor+0x84/0xc2
[<ffffffff8125ecae>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x195/0x211
[<ffffffff8125f6fb>] store_scaling_governor+0x1e7/0x223
[<ffffffff8126038f>] store+0x5f/0x83
[<ffffffff81125107>] sysfs_write_file+0xe4/0x119
[<ffffffff810d24ae>] vfs_write+0xab/0x105
[<ffffffff810d25cc>] sys_write+0x47/0x70
[<ffffffff8100bc2b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
-> #1 (&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, cpu)){+++++.}:
[<ffffffff81063529>] __lock_acquire+0xa63/0xbeb
[<ffffffff8106379f>] lock_acquire+0xee/0x112
[<ffffffff812f5561>] down_write+0x3d/0x49
[<ffffffff8125fc31>] lock_policy_rwsem_write+0x48/0x78
[<ffffffffa007364c>] do_dbs_timer+0x5f/0x27f [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff81050869>] worker_thread+0x24b/0x367
[<ffffffff810547c1>] kthread+0x56/0x83
[<ffffffff8100cd3a>] child_rip+0xa/0x20
[<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
-> #0 (&(&dbs_info->work)->work){+.+...}:
[<ffffffff8106341d>] __lock_acquire+0x957/0xbeb
[<ffffffff8106379f>] lock_acquire+0xee/0x112
[<ffffffff81051189>] __cancel_work_timer+0x10d/0x21d
[<ffffffff810512a6>] cancel_delayed_work_sync+0xd/0xf
[<ffffffffa0073abb>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x24f/0x2cc [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff8125eaa4>] __cpufreq_governor+0x84/0xc2
[<ffffffff8125ec98>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x17f/0x211
[<ffffffff8125f6fb>] store_scaling_governor+0x1e7/0x223
[<ffffffff8126038f>] store+0x5f/0x83
[<ffffffff81125107>] sysfs_write_file+0xe4/0x119
[<ffffffff810d24ae>] vfs_write+0xab/0x105
[<ffffffff810d25cc>] sys_write+0x47/0x70
[<ffffffff8100bc2b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
other info that might help us debug this:
3 locks held by K99cpuspeed/9923:
#0: (&buffer->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8112505b>] sysfs_write_file+0x38/0x119
#1: (&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, cpu)){+++++.}, at: [<ffffffff8125fc31>] lock_policy_rwsem_write+0x48/0x78
#2: (dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa0073aa8>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x23c/0x2cc [cpufreq_ondemand]
stack backtrace:
Pid: 9923, comm: K99cpuspeed Not tainted 2.6.30-rc7-block-2.6 #1
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff81062750>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x71/0x7c
[<ffffffff8106341d>] __lock_acquire+0x957/0xbeb
[<ffffffff8106379f>] lock_acquire+0xee/0x112
[<ffffffff81051155>] ? __cancel_work_timer+0xd9/0x21d
[<ffffffff81051189>] __cancel_work_timer+0x10d/0x21d
[<ffffffff81051155>] ? __cancel_work_timer+0xd9/0x21d
[<ffffffff812f5218>] ? __mutex_lock_common+0x3c2/0x419
[<ffffffffa0073aa8>] ? cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x23c/0x2cc [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff81061e66>] ? mark_held_locks+0x4d/0x6b
[<ffffffffa0073aa8>] ? cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x23c/0x2cc [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff810512a6>] cancel_delayed_work_sync+0xd/0xf
[<ffffffffa0073abb>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x24f/0x2cc [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff810580f1>] ? up_read+0x26/0x2b
[<ffffffff8125eaa4>] __cpufreq_governor+0x84/0xc2
[<ffffffff8125ec98>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x17f/0x211
[<ffffffff8125f6fb>] store_scaling_governor+0x1e7/0x223
[<ffffffff812604dc>] ? handle_update+0x0/0x33
[<ffffffff812f5569>] ? down_write+0x45/0x49
[<ffffffff8126038f>] store+0x5f/0x83
[<ffffffff81125107>] sysfs_write_file+0xe4/0x119
[<ffffffff810d24ae>] vfs_write+0xab/0x105
[<ffffffff810d25cc>] sys_write+0x47/0x70
[<ffffffff8100bc2b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-29 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-28 11:46 [PATCH 0/11] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v9 Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 01/11] ntfs: remove old debug check for dirty data in ntfs_put_super() Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 02/11] btrfs: properly register fs backing device Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 03/11] writeback: move dirty inodes from super_block to backing_dev_info Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 04/11] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushing data Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 14:13 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-05-28 22:28 ` Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 05/11] writeback: get rid of pdflush completely Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 06/11] writeback: separate the flushing state/task from the bdi Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 07/11] writeback: support > 1 flusher thread per bdi Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 08/11] writeback: allow sleepy exit of default writeback task Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 09/11] writeback: add some debug inode list counters to bdi stats Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 10/11] writeback: add name to backing_dev_info Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 11:46 ` [PATCH 11/11] writeback: check for registered bdi in flusher add and inode dirty Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 13:56 ` [PATCH 0/11] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v9 Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-28 22:28 ` Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 14:17 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-05-28 14:19 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-05-28 20:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-28 22:27 ` Jens Axboe
2009-05-29 15:37 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-05-29 15:50 ` Jens Axboe
2009-05-29 16:02 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-05-29 17:07 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-03 7:39 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-06-03 7:44 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-03 7:46 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-06-03 7:50 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-03 7:54 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-06-03 7:59 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-06-03 8:07 ` Jens Axboe
2009-05-28 14:41 ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-29 16:07 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2009-05-29 16:20 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-05-29 17:09 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-03 8:11 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-05-29 17:08 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-03 11:12 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-06-03 11:42 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-04 15:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-04 19:07 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-04 19:13 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-04 19:50 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-04 20:10 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-04 22:34 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-05 19:15 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-05 21:14 ` Jan Kara
2009-06-06 0:18 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-06 0:23 ` Jan Kara
2009-06-06 1:06 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-08 9:23 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-08 12:23 ` Jan Kara
2009-06-08 12:28 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-08 13:01 ` Jan Kara
2009-06-09 18:39 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-06 1:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-06 0:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-04 21:37 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-06-05 1:14 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-06-05 19:16 ` Jens Axboe
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=4A200846.5050109@gmail.com \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=damien.wyart@free.fr \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.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).