public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Kernel crash in icq_free_icq_rcu
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:36:38 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120118163638.GD30204@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F16F3CA.90904@kernel.dk>

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 05:31:06PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2012-01-18 17:24, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 2012-01-18 17:09, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 09:20:05AM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >>>> Not allocating icq if request is never going to go to elevator as elevator
> >>>> switch was happening makes sense to me.
> >>>>
> >>>> I tried this patch. It went little further and crashed at a different
> >>>> place. I think this seems to be separate merging issue Tejun is trying
> >>>> to track down.
> >>>
> >>> Applied Tejun's debug patch to return early and not call into elevator
> >>> for checking whether merge is allowed or not. Things seems to be stable
> >>> now for me.
> >>
> >> Yeah, plug merge is calling into elevator code without any
> >> synchronization, so it's bound to be broken.  Given plugging is
> >> per-task, I don't think we really need to query elevator about merging
> >> bio's.  The request is not on elevator and plugging is part of issuing
> >> mechanism, not scheduling, after all.  Jens, what do you think?
> > 
> > Hmmm. We can bypass asking the elevator, as long as we query the
> > restrictions. Does the below, by itself, resolve the crash? If yes, let
> > me cook up a patch splitting the elv and blk rq merging logic.
> 
> Something like the below, completely untested.
> 
> But thinking about this a bit while doing it, why is the IO scheduler
> going away while we have plugged requests that are elvpriv?

Not calling ioscheduler during plug merge will allow merging of sync/async
requests together. I guess we wouldn't want that. The only check we can
skip in case of plug merge, is whether bio and rq beong to same task/cfqq
or not.

May be separate elevator functions for plug merge (without lock) and
elevator merge (with lock) will do?

Thanks
Vivek

> 
> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
> index e6c05a9..75eba5c 100644
> --- a/block/blk-core.c
> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static bool attempt_plug_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio,
>  		if (rq->q != q)
>  			continue;
>  
> -		el_ret = elv_try_merge(rq, bio);
> +		el_ret = blk_try_merge(rq, bio);
>  		if (el_ret == ELEVATOR_BACK_MERGE) {
>  			ret = bio_attempt_back_merge(q, rq, bio);
>  			if (ret)
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index cfcc37c..ee9ec90 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -471,3 +471,59 @@ int blk_attempt_req_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq,
>  {
>  	return attempt_merge(q, rq, next);
>  }
> +
> +int blk_rq_merge_ok(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio)
> +{
> +	if (!rq_mergeable(rq))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Don't merge file system requests and discard requests
> +	 */
> +	if ((bio->bi_rw & REQ_DISCARD) != (rq->bio->bi_rw & REQ_DISCARD))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Don't merge discard requests and secure discard requests
> +	 */
> +	if ((bio->bi_rw & REQ_SECURE) != (rq->bio->bi_rw & REQ_SECURE))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * different data direction or already started, don't merge
> +	 */
> +	if (bio_data_dir(bio) != rq_data_dir(rq))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * must be same device and not a special request
> +	 */
> +	if (rq->rq_disk != bio->bi_bdev->bd_disk || rq->special)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * only merge integrity protected bio into ditto rq
> +	 */
> +	if (bio_integrity(bio) != blk_integrity_rq(rq))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	return 1;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_rq_merge_ok);
> +
> +int blk_try_merge(struct request *__rq, struct bio *bio)
> +{
> +	int ret = ELEVATOR_NO_MERGE;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * we can merge and sequence is ok, check if it's possible
> +	 */
> +	if (blk_rq_merge_ok(__rq, bio)) {
> +		if (blk_rq_pos(__rq) + blk_rq_sectors(__rq) == bio->bi_sector)
> +			ret = ELEVATOR_BACK_MERGE;
> +		else if (blk_rq_pos(__rq) - bio_sectors(bio) == bio->bi_sector)
> +			ret = ELEVATOR_FRONT_MERGE;
> +	}
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> diff --git a/block/blk.h b/block/blk.h
> index 7efd772..a117fa9 100644
> --- a/block/blk.h
> +++ b/block/blk.h
> @@ -137,6 +137,8 @@ int blk_attempt_req_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq,
>  				struct request *next);
>  void blk_recalc_rq_segments(struct request *rq);
>  void blk_rq_set_mixed_merge(struct request *rq);
> +int blk_rq_merge_ok(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio);
> +int blk_try_merge(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio);
>  
>  void blk_queue_congestion_threshold(struct request_queue *q);
>  
> diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
> index 91e18f8..a1a75f7 100644
> --- a/block/elevator.c
> +++ b/block/elevator.c
> @@ -72,39 +72,8 @@ static int elv_iosched_allow_merge(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio)
>   */
>  int elv_rq_merge_ok(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio)
>  {
> -	if (!rq_mergeable(rq))
> +	if (!blk_rq_merge_ok(rq, bio))
>  		return 0;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * Don't merge file system requests and discard requests
> -	 */
> -	if ((bio->bi_rw & REQ_DISCARD) != (rq->bio->bi_rw & REQ_DISCARD))
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * Don't merge discard requests and secure discard requests
> -	 */
> -	if ((bio->bi_rw & REQ_SECURE) != (rq->bio->bi_rw & REQ_SECURE))
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * different data direction or already started, don't merge
> -	 */
> -	if (bio_data_dir(bio) != rq_data_dir(rq))
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * must be same device and not a special request
> -	 */
> -	if (rq->rq_disk != bio->bi_bdev->bd_disk || rq->special)
> -		return 0;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * only merge integrity protected bio into ditto rq
> -	 */
> -	if (bio_integrity(bio) != blk_integrity_rq(rq))
> -		return 0;
> -
>  	if (!elv_iosched_allow_merge(rq, bio))
>  		return 0;
>  
> @@ -114,19 +83,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(elv_rq_merge_ok);
>  
>  int elv_try_merge(struct request *__rq, struct bio *bio)
>  {
> -	int ret = ELEVATOR_NO_MERGE;
> -
>  	/*
>  	 * we can merge and sequence is ok, check if it's possible
>  	 */
> -	if (elv_rq_merge_ok(__rq, bio)) {
> -		if (blk_rq_pos(__rq) + blk_rq_sectors(__rq) == bio->bi_sector)
> -			ret = ELEVATOR_BACK_MERGE;
> -		else if (blk_rq_pos(__rq) - bio_sectors(bio) == bio->bi_sector)
> -			ret = ELEVATOR_FRONT_MERGE;
> -	}
> +	if (elv_rq_merge_ok(__rq, bio))
> +		return blk_try_merge(__rq, bio);
>  
> -	return ret;
> +	return ELEVATOR_NO_MERGE;
>  }
>  
>  static struct elevator_type *elevator_find(const char *name)
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe

  reply	other threads:[~2012-01-18 16:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-17 20:18 Kernel crash in icq_free_icq_rcu Vivek Goyal
2012-01-17 20:19 ` Jens Axboe
2012-01-17 20:40   ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-17 20:42     ` Jens Axboe
2012-01-17 20:58       ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-17 21:01         ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-17 21:48 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-17 22:07   ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-18  1:01     ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-18  1:03       ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-18  1:05         ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-18  1:11           ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-18  1:30             ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-18  2:26               ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-18  4:23                 ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-18  6:03               ` Shaohua Li
2012-01-18 13:51                 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-18 14:20                   ` Vivek Goyal
2012-01-18 16:09                     ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-18 16:24                       ` Jens Axboe
2012-01-18 16:31                         ` Jens Axboe
2012-01-18 16:36                           ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2012-01-18 17:10                             ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-18 19:07                               ` Jens Axboe
2012-01-18 19:05                             ` Jens Axboe
2012-01-18 16:55                           ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-18 16:07                 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-19  1:41                   ` [patch]block: fix NULL icq_cache reference Shaohua Li
2012-01-19  1:43                     ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-19  8:20                     ` Jens Axboe

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=20120118163638.GD30204@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
    --cc=tj@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