From: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>,
"linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md/raid5: fix locking in handle_stripe_clean_event()
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:35:04 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ziz1w33r.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <30651446128148@webcorp02d.yandex-team.ru>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3850 bytes --]
On Fri, Oct 30 2015, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> 29.10.2015, 03:35, "Neil Brown" <neilb@suse.de>:
>> On Wed, Oct 28 2015, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>>
>>> After commit 566c09c53455 ("raid5: relieve lock contention in get_active_stripe()")
>>> __find_stripe() is called under conf->hash_locks + hash.
>>> But handle_stripe_clean_event() calls remove_hash() under
>>> conf->device_lock.
>>>
>>> Under some cirscumstances the hash chain can be circuited,
>>> and we get an infinite loop with disabled interrupts and locked hash
>>> lock in __find_stripe(). This leads to hard lockup on multiple CPUs
>>> and following system crash.
>>>
>>> I was able to reproduce this behavior on raid6 over 6 ssd disks.
>>> The devices_handle_discard_safely option should be set to enable trim
>>> support. The following script was used:
>>>
>>> for i in `seq 1 32`; do
>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=large$i bs=10M count=100 &
>>> done
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru>
>>> Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
>>> Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.10 - 3.19
>>
>> Hi Roman,
>> thanks for reporting this and providing a fix.
>>
>> I'm a bit confused by that stable range: 3.10 - 3.19
>>
>> The commit you identify as introducing the bug was added in 3.13, so
>> presumably 3.10, 3.11, 3.12 are not affected.
>
> Sure, it's my mistake. Correct range is 3.13 - 3.19. Sorry.
>
>> Also the bug is still present in mainline, so 4.0, 4.1, 4.2 are also
>> affected, though the patch needs to be revised a bit for 4.1 and later.
>
> Yes, exactly, but things are a bit more complicated in mainline.
> I'll try to prepare a patch for mainline in a couple of days.
>
Thanks for the confirmation.
Isn't the 4.1 fix just:
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
index e5befa356dbe..6e4350a78257 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
@@ -3522,16 +3522,16 @@ returnbi:
* no updated data, so remove it from hash list and the stripe
* will be reinitialized
*/
- spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
unhash:
+ spin_lock_irq(conf->hash_locks + sh->hash_lock_index);
remove_hash(sh);
+ spin_unlock_irq(conf->hash_locks + sh->hash_lock_index);
if (head_sh->batch_head) {
sh = list_first_entry(&sh->batch_list,
struct stripe_head, batch_list);
if (sh != head_sh)
goto unhash;
}
- spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
sh = head_sh;
if (test_bit(STRIPE_SYNC_REQUESTED, &sh->state))
??
Or maybe
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
index e5befa356dbe..704ef7fcfbf8 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
@@ -3509,6 +3509,7 @@ returnbi:
if (!discard_pending &&
test_bit(R5_Discard, &sh->dev[sh->pd_idx].flags)) {
+ int hash;
clear_bit(R5_Discard, &sh->dev[sh->pd_idx].flags);
clear_bit(R5_UPTODATE, &sh->dev[sh->pd_idx].flags);
if (sh->qd_idx >= 0) {
@@ -3522,16 +3523,17 @@ returnbi:
* no updated data, so remove it from hash list and the stripe
* will be reinitialized
*/
- spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
unhash:
+ hash = sh->hash_lock_index;
+ spin_lock_irq(conf->hash_locks + hash);
remove_hash(sh);
+ spin_unlock_irq(conf->hash_locks + hash);
if (head_sh->batch_head) {
sh = list_first_entry(&sh->batch_list,
struct stripe_head, batch_list);
if (sh != head_sh)
goto unhash;
}
- spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
sh = head_sh;
if (test_bit(STRIPE_SYNC_REQUESTED, &sh->state))
For personal reasons I would like to get this resolved today or
tomorrow, though it would be silly to rush if there is any uncertainty.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 818 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-30 1:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-28 8:52 [PATCH] md/raid5: fix locking in handle_stripe_clean_event() Roman Gushchin
2015-10-29 0:34 ` Neil Brown
2015-10-29 14:15 ` Roman Gushchin
2015-10-29 21:22 ` Greg KH
2015-10-30 1:35 ` Neil Brown [this message]
2015-10-30 14:02 ` Roman Gushchin
2015-10-30 16:25 ` Shaohua Li
2015-10-30 22:16 ` Neil Brown
2015-10-31 12:25 ` Roman Gushchin
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=87ziz1w33r.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=klamm@yandex-team.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@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).