From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yang Shi Subject: [PATCH] writeback: call writeback tracepoints withoud holding list_lock in wb_writeback() Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:47:23 -0800 Message-ID: <1456354043-31420-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linaro.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, yang.shi@linaro.org To: tj@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, axboe@fb.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de, rostedt@goodmis.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org Return-path: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org commit 5634cc2aa9aebc77bc862992e7805469dcf83dac ("writeback: update writeback tracepoints to report cgroup") made writeback tracepoints report cgroup writeback, but it may trigger the below bug on -rt kernel due to the list_lock held for the for loop in wb_writeback(). BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:930 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 625, name: kworker/u16:3 INFO: lockdep is turned off. Preemption disabled at:[] wb_writeback+0xec/0x830 CPU: 7 PID: 625 Comm: kworker/u16:3 Not tainted 4.4.1-rt5 #20 Hardware name: Freescale Layerscape 2085a RDB Board (DT) Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-7:0) Call trace: [] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x200 [] show_stack+0x24/0x30 [] dump_stack+0x88/0xa8 [] ___might_sleep+0x2ec/0x300 [] rt_spin_lock+0x38/0xb8 [] kernfs_path_len+0x30/0x90 [] trace_event_raw_event_writeback_work_class+0xe8/0x2e8 [] wb_writeback+0x620/0x830 [] wb_workfn+0x61c/0x950 [] process_one_work+0x3ac/0xb30 [] worker_thread+0x9c/0x7a8 [] kthread+0x190/0x1b0 [] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x30 The list_lock was moved outside the for loop by commit e8dfc30582995ae12454cda517b17d6294175b07 ("writeback: elevate queue_io() into wb_writeback())", however, the commit log says "No behavior change", so it sounds safe to have the list_lock acquired inside the for loop as it did before. Just acquire list_lock at the necessary points and keep all writeback tracepoints outside the critical area protected by list_lock in wb_writeback(). Signed-off-by: Yang Shi --- fs/fs-writeback.c | 12 +++++++----- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c index 1f76d89..9b7b5f6 100644 --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c @@ -1623,7 +1623,6 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, work->older_than_this = &oldest_jif; blk_start_plug(&plug); - spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); for (;;) { /* * Stop writeback when nr_pages has been consumed @@ -1661,15 +1660,19 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, oldest_jif = jiffies; trace_writeback_start(wb, work); + + spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); if (list_empty(&wb->b_io)) queue_io(wb, work); if (work->sb) progress = writeback_sb_inodes(work->sb, wb, work); else progress = __writeback_inodes_wb(wb, work); - trace_writeback_written(wb, work); wb_update_bandwidth(wb, wb_start); + spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); + + trace_writeback_written(wb, work); /* * Did we write something? Try for more @@ -1693,15 +1696,14 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb, */ if (!list_empty(&wb->b_more_io)) { trace_writeback_wait(wb, work); + spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); inode = wb_inode(wb->b_more_io.prev); - spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); /* This function drops i_lock... */ inode_sleep_on_writeback(inode); - spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); } } - spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); blk_finish_plug(&plug); return nr_pages - work->nr_pages; -- 2.0.2 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org