From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: emilne@redhat.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com>,
"James E. J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@odin.com>,
brking <brking@us.ibm.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
"Jun'ichi Nomura" <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c:1096!
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:01:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151125180133.GA18839@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <565579A2.4000005@suse.de>
On Wed, Nov 25 2015 at 4:04am -0500,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> wrote:
> On 11/20/2015 04:28 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 15:55 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >> Can't we have a joint effort here?
> >> I've been spending a _LOT_ of time trying to debug things here, but
> >> none of the ideas I've come up with have been able to fix anything.
> >
> > Yes. I'm not the one primarily looking at it, and we don't have a
> > reproducer in-house. We just have the one dump right now.
> >
> >>
> >> I'm almost tempted to increase the count from scsi_alloc_sgtable()
> >> by one and be done with ...
> >>
> >
> > That might not fix it if it is a problem with the merge code, though.
> >
> And indeed, it doesn't.
How did you arrive at that? Do you have a reproducer now?
> Seems I finally found the culprit.
>
> What happens is this:
> We have two paths, with these seg_boundary_masks:
>
> path-1: seg_boundary_mask = 65535,
> path-2: seg_boundary_mask = 4294967295,
>
> consequently the DM request queue has this:
>
> md-1: seg_boundary_mask = 65535,
>
> What happens now is that a request is being formatted, and sent
> to path 2. During submission req->nr_phys_segments is formatted
> with the limits of path 2, arriving at a count of 3.
> Now the request gets retried on path 1, but as the NOMERGE request
> flag is set req->nr_phys_segments is never updated.
> But blk_rq_map_sg() ignores all counters, and just uses the
> bi_vec directly, resulting in a count of 4 -> boom.
>
> So the culprit here is the NOMERGE flag,
NOMERGE is always set in __blk_rq_prep_clone() for cloned requests.
> which is evaluated via
> ->dm_dispatch_request()
> ->blk_insert_cloned_request()
> ->blk_rq_check_limits()
blk_insert_cloned_request() is the only caller of blk_rq_check_limits();
anyway after reading your mail I'm still left wondering if your proposed
patch is correct.
> If the above assessment is correct, the following patch should
> fix it:
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
> index 801ced7..12cccd6 100644
> --- a/block/blk-core.c
> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> @@ -1928,7 +1928,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(submit_bio);
> */
> int blk_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
> {
> - if (!rq_mergeable(rq))
> + if (rq->cmd_type != REQ_TYPE_FS)
> return 0;
>
> if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q,
> rq->cmd_flags)) {
>
>
> Mike? Jens?
> Can you comment on it?
You're not explaining the actual change in the patch very well; I think
you're correct but you're leaving the justification as an exercise to
the reviewer:
blk_rq_check_limits() will call blk_recalc_rq_segments() after the
!rq_mergeable() check but you're saying for this case in question we
never get there -- due to the cloned request having NOMERGE set.
So in blk_rq_check_limits() you've unrolled rq_mergeable() and
open-coded the lone remaining check (rq->cmd_type != REQ_TYPE_FS)
I agree that the (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_NOMERGE_FLAGS) check in
the blk_insert_cloned_request() call-chain (via rq_mergeable()) makes no
sense for cloned requests that always have NOMERGE set.
So you're saying that by having blk_rq_check_limits() go on to call
blk_recalc_rq_segments() this bug will be fixed?
BTW, I think blk_rq_check_limits()'s export should be removed and the
function made static and renamed to blk_clone_rq_check_limits(), again:
blk_insert_cloned_request() is the only caller of blk_rq_check_limits()
Seems prudent to make that change now to be clear that this code is only
used by cloned requests.
Thanks,
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-25 18:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-18 9:18 kernel BUG at drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c:1096! Michael Ellerman
2015-11-18 11:06 ` Laurent Dufour
2015-11-18 11:10 ` Michael Ellerman
2015-11-18 11:17 ` Laurent Dufour
2015-11-18 14:03 ` Mark Salter
2015-11-19 1:02 ` Michael Ellerman
2015-11-19 8:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-11-19 15:35 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-11-20 14:38 ` Ewan Milne
2015-11-20 14:55 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-11-20 15:28 ` Ewan Milne
2015-11-23 6:55 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-11-25 9:04 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-11-25 17:56 ` Jens Axboe
2015-11-25 19:10 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-11-25 19:24 ` Jens Axboe
2015-11-25 20:23 ` Mike Snitzer
2015-11-25 21:20 ` Mike Snitzer
2015-11-25 18:01 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2015-11-25 19:01 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-12-04 16:59 ` Takashi Iwai
2015-12-04 17:02 ` Jens Axboe
2015-12-04 17:09 ` Takashi Iwai
2015-11-20 12:10 ` Michael Ellerman
2015-11-20 12:56 ` Laurent Dufour
2015-11-20 13:37 ` Mark Salter
2015-11-21 11:30 ` Laurent Dufour
2015-11-21 16:56 ` Ming Lei
2015-11-22 23:20 ` Mark Salter
2015-11-23 0:36 ` Ming Lei
2015-11-23 1:50 ` Mark Salter
2015-11-23 2:46 ` Ming Lei
2015-11-23 15:21 ` Ming Lei
2015-11-24 18:59 ` Alan Ott
2015-11-23 13:57 ` Laurent Dufour
2015-11-23 15:13 ` Pratyush Anand
2015-11-23 15:20 ` Laurent Dufour
2015-11-23 15:27 ` Ming Lei
2015-11-23 16:24 ` Laurent Dufour
2015-11-24 1:30 ` Mark Salter
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=20151125180133.GA18839@redhat.com \
--to=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=JBottomley@odin.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=brking@us.ibm.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=msalter@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).