linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 17:10:05 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150527001005.GA106894@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150527093451.0c83be44@notabene.brown>

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 09:34:51AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2015 08:35:32 +1000 NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> > Could you please review and possibly test the patch below?
> > 
> 
> well... that patch had a fairly obvious double-lock bug.
> Try this one.
> (oh, just saw your email that you spotted the lock bug :-)
> 
> 
> NeilBrown
> 
> From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 08:43:45 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] md/raid5: close race between STRIPE_BIT_DELAY and batching.
> 
> The first time a write is added to a stripe, we need to set the
> bitmap bits (if a bitmap is active).
> While doing that the stripe is not locked and other writes could
> be added and then the stripe could be added to a batch.
> Once it has entered the batch it is too large to set STRIPE_BIT_DELAY
> as the batch head has taken over when the stripe will be written.
> 
> We cannot hold the spinlock while adding the bitmap bit,
> so introduce a new stripe_head flag 'STRIPE_BITMAP_PENDING' which
> indicates that adding to the bitmap is pending.  This prevents
> the stripe from being added to a batch.
> 
> Only the first thread to add a write to a stripe can set this bit,
> so it is safe for it to clear it again when it is done.
> 
> Reported-by: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> index 73b5376dad3b..dae587ecdf71 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> @@ -760,6 +760,7 @@ static void unlock_two_stripes(struct stripe_head *sh1, struct stripe_head *sh2)
>  static bool stripe_can_batch(struct stripe_head *sh)
>  {
>  	return test_bit(STRIPE_BATCH_READY, &sh->state) &&
> +		!test_bit(STRIPE_BITMAP_PENDING, &sh->state) &&
>  		is_full_stripe_write(sh);
>  }
>  
> @@ -3007,14 +3008,27 @@ static int add_stripe_bio(struct stripe_head *sh, struct bio *bi, int dd_idx,
>  	pr_debug("added bi b#%llu to stripe s#%llu, disk %d.\n",
>  		(unsigned long long)(*bip)->bi_iter.bi_sector,
>  		(unsigned long long)sh->sector, dd_idx);
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&sh->stripe_lock);
>  
>  	if (conf->mddev->bitmap && firstwrite) {
> +		/* Cannot hold spinlock over bitmap_startwrite,
> +		 * but must ensure this isn't added to a batch until
> +		 * we have added to the bitmap and set bm_seq.
> +		 * So set STRIPE_BITMAP_PENDING to prevent
> +		 * batching.
> +		 * Only the first thread to add a write to a stripe
> +		 * can set this bit, so we "own" it.
> +		 */
> +		WARN_ON(test_bit(STRIPE_BITMAP_PENDING, &sh->state));
I keep hitting this. the firstwrite is set for every device.

Thanks,
Shaohua

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-27  0:10 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 7/8] md/raid5: call break_stripe_batch_list from handle_stripe_clean_event 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 4/8] md/raid5: duplicate some more handle_stripe_clean_event code in break_stripe_batch_list 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 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
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 [this message]
2015-05-27  0:36               ` 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 1/8] md/raid5: ensure whole batch is delayed for all required bitmap updates NeilBrown
2015-05-22  5:30 ` [PATCH 6/8] md/raid5: be more selective about distributing flags across batch 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=20150527001005.GA106894@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).