public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Tony Battersby <tonyb@cybernetics.com>,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	axboe@kernel.dk, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: RAID1 might_sleep() warning on 3.19-rc7
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 10:10:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150209091000.GN5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150209121357.29f19d36@notabene.brown>

On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 12:13:57PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> I had to re-read the code (And your analysis) a couple of times to be sure ...

Sorry :-)

> However, when io_schedule() explicitly calls blk_flush_plug(), then
> @from_schedule=false variant is used, and the unplug functions are allowed to
> allocate memory and block and maybe even call mempool_alloc() which might
> call io_schedule().
> 
> This shouldn't be a problem as blk_flush_plug() spliced out the plug list, so
> any recursive call will find an empty list and do nothing.

Unless, something along the way stuck something back on, right? So
should we stick an:

	WARN_ON(current->in_iowait);

somewhere near where things are added to this plug list? (and move the
blk_flush_plug() call inside of where that's actually true of course).

> Worst case is that a wait_event loop that calls io_schedule() (i.e.
> wait_on_bit_io()) might not block in the first call to io_schedule()
> if the unplugging needed to wait.  Every subsequent call will block as
> required as there is nothing else to add requests to the plug queue.

Again, assuming @cond will not actually stick something on this list.
Which if we add the above we'll get warned about.

> It isn't that scheduling is "rare" - it is that it can only occur once in a
> loop which doesn't expect it.

With the above WARN stuck in, agreed.

> So I propose the following, though I haven't tested it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index e628cb11b560..b0f12ab3df23 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -4374,6 +4374,11 @@ void __sched io_schedule(void)
>  
>  	delayacct_blkio_start();
>  	atomic_inc(&rq->nr_iowait);
> +	/* Any sleeping in blk_flush_plug() should not
> +	 * trigger the "do not call blocking ops" warning
> +	 * as it can only happen once in a wait_event loop.
> +	 */

Might I suggest the 'regular' multi-line comment style, and a reference
to the above WARN that makes everything actually work?

	/*
	 * multi-line
	 *  comments have an empty
	 *    line at the start... As per CodingStyle ch. 8
	 */

> +	sched_annotate_sleep();
>  	blk_flush_plug(current);

Also, at this point, should we put it in blk_flush_plug()?


The only thing that really goes wrong then is if people 'forget' to put
a loop around io_schedule().

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-09  9:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <54D3D24E.5060303@cybernetics.com>
2015-02-05 21:51 ` RAID1 might_sleep() warning on 3.19-rc7 NeilBrown
2015-02-06 11:39   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-09  1:13     ` NeilBrown
2015-02-09  9:10       ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-02-10  2:50         ` NeilBrown
2015-02-10  9:29           ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-10 11:01             ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-13  5:26             ` NeilBrown
2015-02-13  8:32               ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-13  8:49                 ` NeilBrown
2015-02-13 10:27                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-13 14:48                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-18  1:09                       ` NeilBrown
2015-02-18 13:47                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-18 17:07               ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Prevent recursion in io_schedule() tip-bot for NeilBrown

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=20150209091000.GN5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=tonyb@cybernetics.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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