From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>,
Steffen Maier <maier@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
Sachin Sant <sachinp@linux.ibm.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
Benjamin Block <bblock@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel BUG scsi_dh_alua sleeping from invalid context && kernel WARNING do not call blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2023 16:29:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <08e7e15e-37e0-0d45-9332-fe4b6e896cb2@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <983f47533ee56b2a954de97dc7e02cbcbc4f9841.camel@suse.com>
On 1/17/23 14:03, Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 13:52 -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 1/17/23 13:48, Martin Wilck wrote:
>>> Yes, that was my suggestion. Just defer the scsi_device_put() call
>>> in
>>> alua_rtpg_queue() in the case where the actual RTPG handler is not
>>> queued. I won't have time for that before next week though.
>>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> Do you agree that the call trace shared by Steffen is not sufficient
>> to
>> conclude that this change is necessary?
>
> Hmm, I suppose I missed your point... to re-iterate my thinking:
>
> 1 alua_queue_rtpg() must take a ref to the sdev before queueing work,
> whether or not the caller already has one
> 2 queue_delayed_work() can fail
> 3 if queue_delayed_work() fails, alua_queue_rtpg() must drop the ref
> it just took
> 4 BUT (and this is what I guess I missed) this ref can't be the last
> one dropped, because the caller of alua_rtpg_queue() must still hold
> a reference. And scsi_device_put() only sleeps if the last ref is
> dropped. Therefore the issue in Steffen's call stack should
> indeed be fixed just by removing the might_sleep(). If all callers
> callers of alua_rtpg_queue() must hold an sdev reference (I believe
> they do), we can indeed remove the might_sleep() entirely.
>
> Is this correct reasoning, and what you meant previously? If yes, I
> agree, and I apologize for not realizing it in the first place.
> But I think this is subtle enough to deserve a comment in the code.
Yes, that's what I'm thinking.
How about the patch below?
Thanks,
Bart.
[PATCH] scsi: device_handler: alua: Remove a might_sleep() annotation
The might_sleep() annotation in alua_rtpg_queue() is not correct since the
command completion code may call this function from atomic context.
Calling alua_rtpg_queue() from atomic context in the command completion
path is fine since request submitters must hold an sdev reference until
command execution has completed. This patch fixes the following kernel
warning:
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c:992
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0xac/0x100
__might_resched+0x284/0x2c8
alua_rtpg_queue+0x3c/0x98 [scsi_dh_alua]
alua_check+0x122/0x250 [scsi_dh_alua]
alua_check_sense+0x172/0x228 [scsi_dh_alua]
scsi_check_sense+0x8a/0x2e0
scsi_decide_disposition+0x286/0x298
scsi_complete+0x6a/0x108
blk_complete_reqs+0x6e/0x88
__do_softirq+0x13e/0x6b8
__irq_exit_rcu+0x14a/0x170
irq_exit_rcu+0x22/0x50
do_ext_irq+0x10a/0x1d0
Reported-by: Steffen Maier <maier@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Steffen Maier <maier@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
---
drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c
index 55a5073248f8..362fa631f39b 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_alua.c
@@ -987,6 +987,9 @@ static void alua_rtpg_work(struct work_struct *work)
*
* Returns true if and only if alua_rtpg_work() will be called asynchronously.
* That function is responsible for calling @qdata->fn().
+ *
+ * Context: may be called from atomic context (alua_check()) only if the caller
+ * holds an sdev reference.
*/
static bool alua_rtpg_queue(struct alua_port_group *pg,
struct scsi_device *sdev,
@@ -995,8 +998,6 @@ static bool alua_rtpg_queue(struct alua_port_group *pg,
int start_queue = 0;
unsigned long flags;
- might_sleep();
-
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!pg) || scsi_device_get(sdev))
return false;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-18 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-16 14:59 kernel BUG scsi_dh_alua sleeping from invalid context && kernel WARNING do not call blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING Steffen Maier
2023-01-16 16:57 ` Martin Wilck
2023-01-16 17:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-01-16 17:58 ` Martin Wilck
2023-01-17 9:28 ` Martin Wilck
2023-01-17 18:50 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-01-17 21:48 ` Martin Wilck
2023-01-17 21:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-01-17 22:03 ` Martin Wilck
2023-01-18 0:29 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2023-01-18 8:45 ` Martin Wilck
2023-01-18 16:17 ` Steffen Maier
2023-01-24 11:16 ` Steffen Maier
2023-01-24 11:36 ` Martin Wilck
2023-01-16 17:55 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-01-16 18:12 ` Steffen Maier
2023-01-16 18:31 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-01-17 7:46 ` Martin Wilck
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=08e7e15e-37e0-0d45-9332-fe4b6e896cb2@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=bblock@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maier@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=mwilck@suse.com \
--cc=sachinp@linux.ibm.com \
/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