From: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] md/raid5: Ensure a batch member is not handled prematurely.
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 11:16:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150526181647.GA38853@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150523102640.20be3fca@notabene.brown>
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:26:40AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2015 16:44:02 -0700 Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 03:30:58PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > If a stripe is a member of a batch, but not the head, it must
> > > not be handled separately from the rest of the batch.
> > >
> > > 'clear_batch_ready()' handles this requirement to some
> > > extent but not completely. If a member is passed to handle_stripe()
> > > a second time it returns '0' indicating the stripe can be handled,
> > > which is wrong.
> > > So add an extra test.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/md/raid5.c | 6 +++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> > > index c3ccefbd4fe7..9a803b735848 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> > > @@ -4192,9 +4192,13 @@ static void analyse_stripe(struct stripe_head *sh, struct stripe_head_state *s)
> > >
> > > static int clear_batch_ready(struct stripe_head *sh)
> > > {
> > > + /* Return '1' if this is a member of batch, or
> > > + * '0' if it is a lone stripe or a head which can now be
> > > + * handled.
> > > + */
> > > struct stripe_head *tmp;
> > > if (!test_and_clear_bit(STRIPE_BATCH_READY, &sh->state))
> > > - return 0;
> > > + return (sh->batch_head && sh->batch_head != sh);
> > > spin_lock(&sh->stripe_lock);
> > > if (!sh->batch_head) {
> > > spin_unlock(&sh->stripe_lock);
> >
> > which case can this happen in?
>
> It definitely happens as I had reliable problems until I added this fix.
> 'retry_aligned_read()' can call handle_stripe() on any stripe at any time,
> but I doubt that would apply. I might try putting a warn-on there and see if
> it provides any hints.
>
> >
> > Patches look good. But I'm not in Fusionio any more, so can't check the
> > performance in big raid array with fast flash cards. I'm doing some tests here.
> > I hit a warning in break_stripe_batch_list, STRIPE_BIT_DELAY is set in the
> > stripe state. I'm checking the reason, but if you have thoughts I can try
> > immediately, please let me know.
>
> I got STRIPE_BIT_DELAY a few times. That was the main reason for
>
> md/raid5: ensure whole batch is delayed for all required bitmap updates.
>
> and they went away after I got that patch right.
>
> Maybe there is a race in there..
>
> If you can reproduce it, maybe WARN whenever STRIPE_BIT_DELAY gets set on a
> stripe with ->batch_head.
Ok, there is a race in add_stripe_bio(). We unlocked the stripe_lock to set the
BIT_DELAY. After the unlock, the stripe might be added to a batch,
stripe_add_to_batch_list didn't clear the bit. Holding the lock in
add_stripe_bio and checking ->batch_head again when we set the bit should fix
the issue.
And STRIPE_ON_UNPLUG_LIST and STRIPE_ON_RELEASE_LIST are set is legit in
break_stripe_batch_list(), they should be removed from the WARN_ON_ONCE().
Thanks,
Shaohua
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-26 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-22 5:30 [PATCH 0/8] Fixes for md/raid5 stripe batching code NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 6/8] md/raid5: be more selective about distributing flags across batch NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 1/8] md/raid5: ensure whole batch is delayed for all required bitmap updates NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 8/8] md/raid5: break stripe-batches when the array has failed NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 2/8] md/raid5: Ensure a batch member is not handled prematurely NeilBrown
2015-05-22 23:44 ` Shaohua Li
2015-05-23 0:26 ` NeilBrown
2015-05-26 18:16 ` Shaohua Li [this message]
2015-05-26 22:35 ` NeilBrown
2015-05-26 23:21 ` Shaohua Li
2015-05-26 23:34 ` NeilBrown
2015-05-27 0:10 ` Shaohua Li
2015-05-27 0:36 ` NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 3/8] md/raid5: remove condition test from check_break_stripe_batch_list NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 4/8] md/raid5: duplicate some more handle_stripe_clean_event code in break_stripe_batch_list NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 5/8] md/raid5: add handle_flags arg to break_stripe_batch_list NeilBrown
2015-05-22 5:30 ` [PATCH 7/8] md/raid5: call break_stripe_batch_list from handle_stripe_clean_event NeilBrown
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=20150526181647.GA38853@kernel.org \
--to=shli@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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).