linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>
Subject: [PATCH] md/raid5: make use of spin_lock_irq over local_irq_disable + spin_lock
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 12:41:02 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170428174102.30003-1-julia@ni.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170427185719.708758b6@brick.gerasiov.net>

On mainline, there is no functional difference, just less code, and
symmetric lock/unlock paths.

On PREEMPT_RT builds, this fixes the following warning, seen by
Alexander GQ Gerasiov, due to the sleeping nature of spinlocks.

   BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:993
   in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 58, name: kworker/u12:1
   CPU: 5 PID: 58 Comm: kworker/u12:1 Tainted: G        W       4.9.20-rt16-stand6-686 #1
   Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-5027R-WRF/X9SRW-F, BIOS 3.2a 10/28/2015
   Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-253:0)
   Call Trace:
    dump_stack+0x47/0x68
    ? migrate_enable+0x4a/0xf0
    ___might_sleep+0x101/0x180
    rt_spin_lock+0x17/0x40
    add_stripe_bio+0x4e3/0x6c0 [raid456]
    ? preempt_count_add+0x42/0xb0
    raid5_make_request+0x737/0xdd0 [raid456]

Reported-by: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@redlab-i.ru>
Tested-by: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@redlab-i.ru>
Signed-off-by: Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com>
---
Hey All-

While this fixes a problem on RT primarily, the patch is equally applicable
upstream, as such probably makes sense to be pulled through the md tree.  It
may also make sense to be pulled directly into rt-devel.

Alexander-

I turned your "I confirm the fix" to a 'Tested-by', let me know if that's a problem.

Thanks,

   Julia

 drivers/md/raid5.c | 17 +++++++----------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
index fa2c4de32a64..54dc2995aeee 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
@@ -110,8 +110,7 @@ static inline void unlock_device_hash_lock(struct r5conf *conf, int hash)
 static inline void lock_all_device_hash_locks_irq(struct r5conf *conf)
 {
 	int i;
-	local_irq_disable();
-	spin_lock(conf->hash_locks);
+	spin_lock_irq(conf->hash_locks);
 	for (i = 1; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++)
 		spin_lock_nest_lock(conf->hash_locks + i, conf->hash_locks);
 	spin_lock(&conf->device_lock);
@@ -121,9 +120,9 @@ static inline void unlock_all_device_hash_locks_irq(struct r5conf *conf)
 {
 	int i;
 	spin_unlock(&conf->device_lock);
-	for (i = NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i; i--)
-		spin_unlock(conf->hash_locks + i - 1);
-	local_irq_enable();
+	for (i = NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS - 1; i; i--)
+		spin_unlock(conf->hash_locks + i);
+	spin_unlock_irq(conf->hash_locks);
 }
 
 /* bio's attached to a stripe+device for I/O are linked together in bi_sector
@@ -732,12 +731,11 @@ static bool is_full_stripe_write(struct stripe_head *sh)
 
 static void lock_two_stripes(struct stripe_head *sh1, struct stripe_head *sh2)
 {
-	local_irq_disable();
 	if (sh1 > sh2) {
-		spin_lock(&sh2->stripe_lock);
+		spin_lock_irq(&sh2->stripe_lock);
 		spin_lock_nested(&sh1->stripe_lock, 1);
 	} else {
-		spin_lock(&sh1->stripe_lock);
+		spin_lock_irq(&sh1->stripe_lock);
 		spin_lock_nested(&sh2->stripe_lock, 1);
 	}
 }
@@ -745,8 +743,7 @@ static void lock_two_stripes(struct stripe_head *sh1, struct stripe_head *sh2)
 static void unlock_two_stripes(struct stripe_head *sh1, struct stripe_head *sh2)
 {
 	spin_unlock(&sh1->stripe_lock);
-	spin_unlock(&sh2->stripe_lock);
-	local_irq_enable();
+	spin_unlock_irq(&sh2->stripe_lock);
 }
 
 /* Only freshly new full stripe normal write stripe can be added to a batch list */
-- 
2.12.0

       reply	other threads:[~2017-04-28 17:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20170427185719.708758b6@brick.gerasiov.net>
2017-04-28 17:41 ` Julia Cartwright [this message]
2017-05-01 23:11   ` [PATCH] md/raid5: make use of spin_lock_irq over local_irq_disable + spin_lock Shaohua Li

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=20170428174102.30003-1-julia@ni.com \
    --to=julia@ni.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=gq@cs.msu.su \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shli@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).