linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@googlemail.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Deadlock possibly caused by too_many_isolated.
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 17:40:51 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101025174051.31a00481@notabene> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101024165234.GA23508@localhost>

On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 00:52:34 +0800
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 04:09:21PM +0800, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 2010-10-22 10:07, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > >>> We surely need 1 set aside for each level of that stack that will
> > >>> potentially consume one. 1 should be enough for the generic pool, and
> > >>> then clones will use a separate pool. So md and friends should really
> > >>> have a pool per device, so that stacking will always work properly.
> > >>
> > >> Agreed for the deadlock problem.
> > >>
> > >>> There should be no throughput concerns, it should purely be a safe guard
> > >>> measure to prevent us deadlocking when doing IO for reclaim.
> > >>
> > >> It's easy to verify whether the minimal size will have negative
> > >> impacts on IO throughput. In Torsten's case, increase BIO_POOL_SIZE
> > >> by one and check how it performs.
> > > 
> > > Sorry it seems simply increasing BIO_POOL_SIZE is not enough to fix
> > > possible deadlocks. We need adding new mempool(s). Because when there
> > > BIO_POOL_SIZE=2 and there are two concurrent reclaimers each take 1
> > > reservation, they will deadlock each other when trying to take the
> > > next bio at the raid1 level.
> > 
> > Yes, plus it's not a practical solution since you don't know how deep
> > the stack is. As I wrote in the initial email, each consumer needs it's
> > own private mempool (and just 1 entry should suffice).
> 
> You are right. The below scratch patch adds minimal mempool code for raid1.
> It passed simple stress test of resync + 3 dd writers. Although write
> throughput is rather slow in my qemu, I don't observe any
> temporary/permanent stuck ups.

Hi,
  thanks for the patch.  I'll make a few changes to what I finally apply -
  for example we don't really need mempools in r1buf_poll_alloc as that isn't
  on the writeout path - so I'll tidy that up first.

  Also I'll avoid making changes to fs/bio.c at first.  It may still be a
  good idea to have a bio_clone_bioset, but that should be a separate patch -
  there are at least 3 places that would use it.

Thanks - I'll try to get this into the current merge window.

NeilBrown


> 
>  drivers/md/raid1.c  |   32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  drivers/md/raid1.h  |    2 ++
>  fs/bio.c            |   31 +++++++++++++++++++++----------
>  include/linux/bio.h |    2 ++
>  4 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> --- linux-next.orig/drivers/md/raid1.c	2010-10-25 00:02:40.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-next/drivers/md/raid1.c	2010-10-25 00:28:16.000000000 +0800
> @@ -76,6 +76,14 @@ static void r1bio_pool_free(void *r1_bio
>  	kfree(r1_bio);
>  }
>  
> +static void r1_bio_destructor(struct bio *bio)
> +{
> +	r1bio_t *r1_bio = bio->bi_private;
> +	conf_t *conf = r1_bio->mddev->private;
> +
> +	bio_free(bio, conf->r1_bio_set);
> +}
> +
>  #define RESYNC_BLOCK_SIZE (64*1024)
>  //#define RESYNC_BLOCK_SIZE PAGE_SIZE
>  #define RESYNC_SECTORS (RESYNC_BLOCK_SIZE >> 9)
> @@ -85,6 +93,7 @@ static void r1bio_pool_free(void *r1_bio
>  static void * r1buf_pool_alloc(gfp_t gfp_flags, void *data)
>  {
>  	struct pool_info *pi = data;
> +	conf_t *conf = pi->mddev->private;
>  	struct page *page;
>  	r1bio_t *r1_bio;
>  	struct bio *bio;
> @@ -100,7 +109,8 @@ static void * r1buf_pool_alloc(gfp_t gfp
>  	 * Allocate bios : 1 for reading, n-1 for writing
>  	 */
>  	for (j = pi->raid_disks ; j-- ; ) {
> -		bio = bio_alloc(gfp_flags, RESYNC_PAGES);
> +		bio = bio_alloc_bioset(gfp_flags, RESYNC_PAGES,
> +				       conf->r1_bio_set);
>  		if (!bio)
>  			goto out_free_bio;
>  		r1_bio->bios[j] = bio;
> @@ -386,6 +396,10 @@ static void raid1_end_write_request(stru
>  				!test_bit(R1BIO_Degraded, &r1_bio->state),
>  				behind);
>  		md_write_end(r1_bio->mddev);
> +		if (to_put) {
> +			bio_put(to_put);
> +			to_put = NULL;
> +		}
>  		raid_end_bio_io(r1_bio);
>  	}
>  
> @@ -851,7 +865,7 @@ static int make_request(mddev_t *mddev, 
>  		}
>  		r1_bio->read_disk = rdisk;
>  
> -		read_bio = bio_clone(bio, GFP_NOIO);
> +		read_bio = bio_clone_bioset(bio, GFP_NOIO, conf->r1_bio_set);
>  
>  		r1_bio->bios[rdisk] = read_bio;
>  
> @@ -946,7 +960,7 @@ static int make_request(mddev_t *mddev, 
>  		if (!r1_bio->bios[i])
>  			continue;
>  
> -		mbio = bio_clone(bio, GFP_NOIO);
> +		mbio = bio_clone_bioset(bio, GFP_NOIO, conf->r1_bio_set);
>  		r1_bio->bios[i] = mbio;
>  
>  		mbio->bi_sector	= r1_bio->sector + conf->mirrors[i].rdev->data_offset;
> @@ -1646,7 +1660,9 @@ static void raid1d(mddev_t *mddev)
>  					mddev->ro ? IO_BLOCKED : NULL;
>  				r1_bio->read_disk = disk;
>  				bio_put(bio);
> -				bio = bio_clone(r1_bio->master_bio, GFP_NOIO);
> +				bio = bio_clone_bioset(r1_bio->master_bio,
> +						       GFP_NOIO,
> +						       conf->r1_bio_set);
>  				r1_bio->bios[r1_bio->read_disk] = bio;
>  				rdev = conf->mirrors[disk].rdev;
>  				if (printk_ratelimit())
> @@ -1948,6 +1964,10 @@ static conf_t *setup_conf(mddev_t *mddev
>  					  conf->poolinfo);
>  	if (!conf->r1bio_pool)
>  		goto abort;
> +	conf->r1_bio_set = bioset_create(mddev->raid_disks * 2, 0);
> +	if (!conf->r1_bio_set)
> +		goto abort;
> +	conf->r1_bio_set->bio_destructor = r1_bio_destructor;
>  
>  	conf->poolinfo->mddev = mddev;
>  
> @@ -2012,6 +2032,8 @@ static conf_t *setup_conf(mddev_t *mddev
>  	if (conf) {
>  		if (conf->r1bio_pool)
>  			mempool_destroy(conf->r1bio_pool);
> +		if (conf->r1_bio_set)
> +			bioset_free(conf->r1_bio_set);
>  		kfree(conf->mirrors);
>  		safe_put_page(conf->tmppage);
>  		kfree(conf->poolinfo);
> @@ -2121,6 +2143,8 @@ static int stop(mddev_t *mddev)
>  	blk_sync_queue(mddev->queue); /* the unplug fn references 'conf'*/
>  	if (conf->r1bio_pool)
>  		mempool_destroy(conf->r1bio_pool);
> +	if (conf->r1_bio_set)
> +		bioset_free(conf->r1_bio_set);
>  	kfree(conf->mirrors);
>  	kfree(conf->poolinfo);
>  	kfree(conf);
> --- linux-next.orig/fs/bio.c	2010-10-25 00:02:39.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-next/fs/bio.c	2010-10-25 00:03:37.000000000 +0800
> @@ -306,6 +306,7 @@ out_set:
>  	bio->bi_flags |= idx << BIO_POOL_OFFSET;
>  	bio->bi_max_vecs = nr_iovecs;
>  	bio->bi_io_vec = bvl;
> +	bio->bi_destructor = bs->bio_destructor;
>  	return bio;
>  
>  err_free:
> @@ -340,12 +341,7 @@ static void bio_fs_destructor(struct bio
>   */
>  struct bio *bio_alloc(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nr_iovecs)
>  {
> -	struct bio *bio = bio_alloc_bioset(gfp_mask, nr_iovecs, fs_bio_set);
> -
> -	if (bio)
> -		bio->bi_destructor = bio_fs_destructor;
> -
> -	return bio;
> +	return bio_alloc_bioset(gfp_mask, nr_iovecs, fs_bio_set);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(bio_alloc);
>  
> @@ -460,20 +456,21 @@ void __bio_clone(struct bio *bio, struct
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(__bio_clone);
>  
>  /**
> - *	bio_clone	-	clone a bio
> + *	bio_clone_bioset	-	clone a bio
>   *	@bio: bio to clone
>   *	@gfp_mask: allocation priority
> + *	@bs: bio_set to allocate from
>   *
>   * 	Like __bio_clone, only also allocates the returned bio
>   */
> -struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +struct bio *
> +bio_clone_bioset(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask, struct bio_set *bs)
>  {
> -	struct bio *b = bio_alloc_bioset(gfp_mask, bio->bi_max_vecs, fs_bio_set);
> +	struct bio *b = bio_alloc_bioset(gfp_mask, bio->bi_max_vecs, bs);
>  
>  	if (!b)
>  		return NULL;
>  
> -	b->bi_destructor = bio_fs_destructor;
>  	__bio_clone(b, bio);
>  
>  	if (bio_integrity(bio)) {
> @@ -489,6 +486,19 @@ struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, g
>  
>  	return b;
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bio_clone_bioset);
> +
> +/**
> + *	bio_clone	-	clone a bio
> + *	@bio: bio to clone
> + *	@gfp_mask: allocation priority
> + *
> + *	Like __bio_clone, only also allocates the returned bio
> + */
> +struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *bio, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +{
> +	return bio_clone_bioset(bio, gfp_mask, fs_bio_set);
> +}
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(bio_clone);
>  
>  /**
> @@ -1664,6 +1674,7 @@ static int __init init_bio(void)
>  	fs_bio_set = bioset_create(BIO_POOL_SIZE, 0);
>  	if (!fs_bio_set)
>  		panic("bio: can't allocate bios\n");
> +	fs_bio_set->bio_destructor = bio_fs_destructor;
>  
>  	bio_split_pool = mempool_create_kmalloc_pool(BIO_SPLIT_ENTRIES,
>  						     sizeof(struct bio_pair));
> --- linux-next.orig/include/linux/bio.h	2010-10-25 00:02:40.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-next/include/linux/bio.h	2010-10-25 00:03:37.000000000 +0800
> @@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ extern int bio_phys_segments(struct requ
>  
>  extern void __bio_clone(struct bio *, struct bio *);
>  extern struct bio *bio_clone(struct bio *, gfp_t);
> +extern struct bio *bio_clone_bioset(struct bio *, gfp_t, struct bio_set *);
>  
>  extern void bio_init(struct bio *);
>  
> @@ -299,6 +300,7 @@ struct bio_set {
>  	mempool_t *bio_integrity_pool;
>  #endif
>  	mempool_t *bvec_pool;
> +	bio_destructor_t	*bio_destructor;
>  };
>  
>  struct biovec_slab {
> --- linux-next.orig/drivers/md/raid1.h	2010-10-25 00:02:40.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-next/drivers/md/raid1.h	2010-10-25 00:03:37.000000000 +0800
> @@ -60,6 +60,8 @@ struct r1_private_data_s {
>  	mempool_t *r1bio_pool;
>  	mempool_t *r1buf_pool;
>  
> +	struct bio_set *r1_bio_set;
> +
>  	/* When taking over an array from a different personality, we store
>  	 * the new thread here until we fully activate the array.
>  	 */

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-10-25  6:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-14 23:11 Deadlock possibly caused by too_many_isolated Neil Brown
2010-09-15  0:30 ` Rik van Riel
2010-09-15  2:23   ` Neil Brown
2010-09-15  2:37     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-15  2:54       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-15  3:06         ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-15  3:13           ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-15  3:18             ` Shaohua Li
2010-09-15  3:31               ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-15  3:17           ` Neil Brown
2010-09-15  3:47             ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-15  8:28     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-15  8:44       ` Neil Brown
2010-10-18  4:14         ` Neil Brown
2010-10-18  5:04           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-18 10:58           ` Torsten Kaiser
2010-10-18 23:11             ` Neil Brown
2010-10-19  8:43               ` Torsten Kaiser
2010-10-19 10:06                 ` Torsten Kaiser
2010-10-20  5:57                   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-20  7:05                     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-20  9:27                       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-20 13:03                         ` Jens Axboe
2010-10-22  5:37                           ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-22  8:07                             ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-22  8:09                               ` Jens Axboe
2010-10-24 16:52                                 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-25  6:40                                   ` Neil Brown [this message]
2010-10-25  7:26                                     ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-20  7:25                     ` Torsten Kaiser
2010-10-20  9:01                       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-20 10:07                         ` Torsten Kaiser
2010-10-20 14:23                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-20 15:35                         ` Torsten Kaiser
2010-10-20 23:31                           ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-18 16:15           ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-18 21:58             ` Andrew Morton
2010-10-18 22:31               ` Neil Brown
2010-10-18 22:41                 ` Andrew Morton
2010-10-19  0:57                   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-19  1:15                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-19  1:21                       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-19  1:32                         ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-19  2:03                           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-19  2:16                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-19  2:54                               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-19  2:35                       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-19  2:52                         ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-19  3:05                           ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-19  3:09                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-19  3:13                               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-19  5:11                                 ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-19  3:21                               ` Shaohua Li
2010-10-19  7:15                                 ` Shaohua Li
2010-10-19  7:34                                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-19  2:24                   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-19  2:37                     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-10-19  2:37                     ` Minchan Kim

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=20101025174051.31a00481@notabene \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=just.for.lkml@googlemail.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=shaohua.li@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).