From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Breno Leitao" <leitao@debian.org>,
"Alexander Viro" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"Christian Brauner" <brauner@kernel.org>,
"Jan Kara" <jack@suse.cz>,
"Julian Sun" <sunjunchao@bytedance.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David Hildenbrand" <david@kernel.org>,
"Lorenzo Stoakes" <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
"Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@kernel.org>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@kernel.org>,
"Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.com>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Roman Gushchin" <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
"Shakeel Butt" <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
"Muchun Song" <muchun.song@linux.dev>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team@meta.com, tj@kernel.org,
mkoutny@suse.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] writeback: report a slow writeback wait once per timeout
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2026 11:47:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-208900@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261110-writeback_stall_report-v2-4-9e0ed75074ca@debian.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential
issue to consider:
- [High] writeback: hung task wakeup interval exceeds timeout in
writeback_sb_inodes()
--
commit f3edfd7b6ff429943317ab66c7dd1c29f9226156
Author: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
writeback: report a slow writeback wait once per timeout
This commit rate-limits the slow writeback report in
wb_wait_for_completion_cb() to once per hung_task_timeout_secs, initializes
done->progress_stamp when waiting starts, and increases the progress wakeup
interval in writeback_sb_inodes() from half the timeout to the full timeout.
> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> index e2da4781b5e00..fcb7fb0196208 100644
> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> @@ -203,12 +203,13 @@ static bool wb_wait_for_completion_cb(struct wb_completion *done,
> unsigned long waited_secs = (jiffies - done->wait_start) / HZ;
> int left = atomic_read(&done->cnt);
>
> - done->progress_stamp = jiffies;
> - if (left && timeout && (waited_secs > timeout))
> + if (left && timeout &&
> + time_after(jiffies, done->progress_stamp + timeout * HZ))
> pr_info("INFO: The task %s:%d has been waiting for writeback "
> "completion for more than %lu seconds (bdi %s, work items left: %d).\n",
> current->comm, current->pid, waited_secs,
> bdi_dev_name(bdi), left);
> + done->progress_stamp = jiffies;
>
> return !left;
> }
> @@ -230,6 +231,7 @@ void wb_wait_for_completion(struct wb_completion *done,
> unsigned long timeout, waited;
>
> done->wait_start = jiffies;
> + done->progress_stamp = done->wait_start;
> atomic_dec(&done->cnt); /* put down the initial count */
> wait_event(*done->waitq, wb_wait_for_completion_cb(done, bdi));
>
> @@ -2135,7 +2137,7 @@ static long writeback_sb_inodes(struct super_block *sb,
>
> /* Report progress to inform the hung task detector of the progress. */
> if (work->done && work->done->progress_stamp && timeout &&
> - (jiffies - work->done->progress_stamp) > HZ * timeout / 2)
> + (jiffies - work->done->progress_stamp) > HZ * timeout)
> wake_up_all(work->done->waitq);
[Severity: High]
Does raising the wakeup threshold from HZ * timeout / 2 to HZ * timeout cause
khungtaskd to report false-positive hung tasks (or panic when
sysctl_hung_task_panic is set) during slow writeback?
In kernel/hung_task.c, task_is_hung() stamps t->last_switch_time with the
time of the scan that first notices a new switch_count, not the time the
task actually scheduled:
kernel/hung_task.c:task_is_hung() {
...
if (switch_count != t->last_switch_count) {
t->last_switch_count = switch_count;
t->last_switch_time = jiffies;
return false;
}
if (time_is_after_jiffies(t->last_switch_time + timeout * HZ))
return false;
return true;
}
Because writeback_sb_inodes() only checks the threshold after
__writeback_single_inode() finishes, consecutive wakeups are spaced by
HZ * timeout plus the time spent writing the next inode. That wakeup period
is strictly longer than khungtaskd's timeout * HZ detection window, so a scan
that runs right after a wakeup can be followed by the next scan at
last_switch_time + timeout * HZ before the next wakeup happens, defeating
1888635532fb ("writeback: Wake up waiting tasks when finishing the writeback
of a chunk.").
Keeping the wakeup threshold at HZ * timeout / 2 while tracking the last
pr_info() timestamp separately from done->progress_stamp (or only updating
done->progress_stamp when logging) would avoid waking the waiter late.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261110-writeback_stall_report-v2-0-9e0ed75074ca@debian.org?part=4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-11 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-10 11:39 [PATCH v2 0/4] writeback: make slow writeback report more actionable Breno Leitao
2026-11-10 11:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] writeback: add the missing newline to the slow writeback report Breno Leitao
2026-11-10 11:39 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] writeback: name the bdi in " Breno Leitao
2026-11-10 13:27 ` Jan Kara
2026-11-10 11:39 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] writeback: log the end of a slow writeback wait Breno Leitao
2026-11-10 11:39 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] writeback: report a slow writeback wait once per timeout Breno Leitao
2026-11-10 13:29 ` Jan Kara
2026-11-11 11:47 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-11 14:37 ` Jan Kara
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=sashiko-outbox-208900@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=sunjunchao@bytedance.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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