public inbox for linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@linux.dev>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: song@kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
	jens@chianterastutte.eu, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] raid1: ensure bio doesn't have more than BIO_MAX_VECS sectors
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 16:38:59 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0eac4589-ffd2-fb1a-43cc-87722731438a@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YRYj8A+mDfAQBo/E@infradead.org>



On 8/13/21 3:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 02:05:10PM +0800, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
>> From: Guoqing Jiang <jiangguoqing@kylinos.cn>
>>
>> We can't split bio with more than BIO_MAX_VECS sectors, otherwise the
>> below call trace was triggered because we could allocate oversized
>> write behind bio later.
>>
>> [ 8.097936] bvec_alloc+0x90/0xc0
>> [ 8.098934] bio_alloc_bioset+0x1b3/0x260
>> [ 8.099959] raid1_make_request+0x9ce/0xc50 [raid1]
> Which bio_alloc_bioset is this?  The one in alloc_behind_master_bio?

Yes, it should be the one since bio_clone_fast calls bio_alloc_bioset 
with 0 iovecs.

> In which case I think you want to limit the reduction of max_sectors
> to just the write behind case, and clearly document what is going on.

Ok, thanks.

> In general the size of a bio only depends on the number of vectors, not
> the total I/O size.  But alloc_behind_master_bio allocates new backing
> pages using order 0 allocations, so in this exceptional case the total
> size oes actually matter.
>
> While we're at it: this huge memory allocation looks really deadlock
> prone.

Hmm, let me think more about it, or could you share your thought? 😉

Thanks,
Guoqing

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-13  8:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-13  6:05 [PATCH] raid1: ensure bio doesn't have more than BIO_MAX_VECS sectors Guoqing Jiang
2021-08-13  7:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-13  8:38   ` Guoqing Jiang [this message]
2021-08-14  7:55     ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-14  8:57       ` Ming Lei
2021-08-16  6:27         ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-08-16  7:13           ` Ming Lei
2021-08-16  9:37         ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-16 11:40           ` Ming Lei
2021-08-17  5:06             ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-17 12:32               ` Ming Lei
2021-09-24 15:34                 ` Jens Stutte (Archiv)
2021-09-25 23:02                   ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-08-13  9:27 ` kernel test robot
2021-08-13 10:12 ` kernel test robot

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=0eac4589-ffd2-fb1a-43cc-87722731438a@linux.dev \
    --to=guoqing.jiang@linux.dev \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jens@chianterastutte.eu \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.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