From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-x234.google.com (mail-it0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3xJDFs5C9yzDrJW for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 00:02:56 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-it0-x234.google.com with SMTP id v205so66319822itf.1 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: blk_mq_sched_insert_request: inconsistent {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} usage To: Michael Ellerman Cc: "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux block References: <87a83qfosu.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <073ed79c-11ce-e86c-a905-91fd28675d47@kernel.dk> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 08:02:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87a83qfosu.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 07/26/2017 11:10 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Hi Jens, > > I'm seeing the lockdep warning below on shutdown on a Power8 machine > using IPR. > > If I'm reading it right it looks like the spin_lock() (non-irq) in > blk_mq_sched_insert_request() is the immediate cause. All the users of ctx->lock should be from process context. > Looking at blk_mq_requeue_work() (the caller), it is doing > spin_lock_irqsave(). So is switching blk_mq_sched_insert_request() to > spin_lock_irqsave() the right fix? That's because the requeue lock needs to be IRQ safe. However, the context allows for just spin_lock_irq() for that lock there, so that should be fixed up. Not your issue, of course, but we don't need to save flags there. > ipr 0001:08:00.0: shutdown > > ================================ > WARNING: inconsistent lock state > 4.13.0-rc2-gcc6x-gf74c89b #1 Not tainted > -------------------------------- > inconsistent {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} usage. > swapper/28/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes: > (&(&hctx->lock)->rlock){+.?...}, at: [] blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0xa4/0x2a0 > {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at: > lock_acquire+0xec/0x2e0 > _raw_spin_lock+0x44/0x70 > blk_mq_sched_insert_request+0x88/0x1f0 > blk_mq_requeue_work+0x108/0x180 > process_one_work+0x310/0x800 > worker_thread+0x88/0x520 > kthread+0x164/0x1b0 > ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x74 > irq event stamp: 3572314 > hardirqs last enabled at (3572314): [] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x58/0xb0 > hardirqs last disabled at (3572313): [] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x90 > softirqs last enabled at (3572302): [] irq_enter+0x9c/0xe0 > softirqs last disabled at (3572303): [] irq_exit+0x108/0x150 > > other info that might help us debug this: > Possible unsafe locking scenario: > > CPU0 > ---- > lock(&(&hctx->lock)->rlock); > > lock(&(&hctx->lock)->rlock); > > *** DEADLOCK *** > > 2 locks held by swapper/28/0: > #0: ((&ipr_cmd->timer)){+.-...}, at: [] call_timer_fn+0x10/0x4b0 > #1: (rcu_read_lock){......}, at: [] __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xa0/0x2c0 > > stack backtrace: > CPU: 28 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/28 Not tainted 4.13.0-rc2-gcc6x-gf74c89b #1 > Call Trace: > [c000001fffe97550] [c000000000b50818] dump_stack+0xe8/0x160 (unreliable) > [c000001fffe97590] [c0000000001586d0] print_usage_bug+0x2d0/0x390 > [c000001fffe97640] [c000000000158f34] mark_lock+0x7a4/0x8e0 > [c000001fffe976f0] [c00000000015a000] __lock_acquire+0x6a0/0x1a70 > [c000001fffe97860] [c00000000015befc] lock_acquire+0xec/0x2e0 > [c000001fffe97930] [c000000000b71514] _raw_spin_lock+0x44/0x70 > [c000001fffe97960] [c0000000005b60f4] blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0xa4/0x2a0 > [c000001fffe979c0] [c0000000005acac0] __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0x100/0x2c0 > [c000001fffe97a00] [c0000000005ad478] __blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue+0x118/0x130 > [c000001fffe97a40] [c0000000005ad61c] blk_mq_start_hw_queues+0x6c/0xa0 > [c000001fffe97a80] [c000000000797aac] scsi_kick_queue+0x2c/0x60 > [c000001fffe97aa0] [c000000000797cf0] scsi_run_queue+0x210/0x360 > [c000001fffe97b10] [c00000000079b888] scsi_run_host_queues+0x48/0x80 > [c000001fffe97b40] [c0000000007b6090] ipr_ioa_bringdown_done+0x70/0x1e0 > [c000001fffe97bc0] [c0000000007bc860] ipr_reset_ioa_job+0x80/0xf0 > [c000001fffe97bf0] [c0000000007b4d50] ipr_reset_timer_done+0xd0/0x100 > [c000001fffe97c30] [c0000000001937bc] call_timer_fn+0xdc/0x4b0 > [c000001fffe97cf0] [c000000000193d08] expire_timers+0x178/0x330 > [c000001fffe97d60] [c0000000001940c8] run_timer_softirq+0xb8/0x120 > [c000001fffe97de0] [c000000000b726a8] __do_softirq+0x168/0x6d8 > [c000001fffe97ef0] [c0000000000df2c8] irq_exit+0x108/0x150 > [c000001fffe97f10] [c000000000017bf4] __do_irq+0x2a4/0x4a0 > [c000001fffe97f90] [c00000000002da50] call_do_irq+0x14/0x24 > [c0000007fad93aa0] [c000000000017e8c] do_IRQ+0x9c/0x140 > [c0000007fad93af0] [c000000000008b98] hardware_interrupt_common+0x138/0x140 > --- interrupt: 501 at .L1.42+0x0/0x4 > LR = arch_local_irq_restore.part.4+0x84/0xb0 > [c0000007fad93de0] [c0000007ffc1f7d8] 0xc0000007ffc1f7d8 (unreliable) > [c0000007fad93e00] [c000000000988d3c] cpuidle_enter_state+0x1bc/0x530 > [c0000007fad93e60] [c0000000001457cc] call_cpuidle+0x4c/0x90 > [c0000007fad93e80] [c000000000145b28] do_idle+0x208/0x2f0 > [c0000007fad93ef0] [c000000000145f8c] cpu_startup_entry+0x3c/0x50 > [c0000007fad93f20] [c000000000042bc0] start_secondary+0x3b0/0x4b0 > [c0000007fad93f90] [c00000000000ac6c] start_secondary_prolog+0x10/0x14 The bug looks like SCSI running the queue inline from IRQ context, that's not a good idea. Can you confirm the below works for you? diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c index f6097b89d5d3..78740ebf966c 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c @@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ static void scsi_run_queue(struct request_queue *q) scsi_starved_list_run(sdev->host); if (q->mq_ops) - blk_mq_run_hw_queues(q, false); + blk_mq_run_hw_queues(q, true); else blk_run_queue(q); } -- Jens Axboe -- Jens Axboe