linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Nikolay Borisov <kernel@kyup.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] fs/super.c: don't fool lockdep in freeze_super() and thaw_super() paths
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:44:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161005164432.GB15121@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161004194435.GW9806@dastard>

On 10/05, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 01:43:43PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > plus the following warnings:
> >
> > 	[ 1894.500040] run fstests generic/070 at 2016-10-04 05:03:39
> > 	[ 1895.076655] =================================
> > 	[ 1895.077136] [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> > 	[ 1895.077574] 4.8.0 #1 Not tainted
> > 	[ 1895.077900] ---------------------------------
> > 	[ 1895.078330] inconsistent {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} -> {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} usage.
> > 	[ 1895.078993] fsstress/18239 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
> > 	[ 1895.079522]  (&xfs_nondir_ilock_class){++++?-}, at: [<ffffffffc049ad45>] xfs_ilock+0x165/0x210 [xfs]
> > 	[ 1895.080529] {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} state was registered at:
>
> And that is a bug in the lockdep annotations for memory allocation because it
> fails to take into account the current task flags that are set via
> memalloc_noio_save() to prevent vmalloc from doing GFP_KERNEL allocations. i.e.
> in _xfs_buf_map_pages():

OK, I see...

I'll re-test with the following change:

	--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
	+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
	@@ -2867,7 +2867,7 @@ static void __lockdep_trace_alloc(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned long flags)
			return;
	 
		/* We're only interested __GFP_FS allocations for now */
	-       if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS))
	+       if ((curr->flags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO) || !(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS))
			return;


Hmm. This is off-topic and most probably I missed something... but at
first glance we can simplify/improve the reclaim-fs lockdep annotations:

1. add the global "struct lockdep_map reclaim_fs_map"

2. change __lockdep_trace_alloc

	-	mark_held_locks(curr, RECLAIM_FS);
	+	lock_map_acquire(&reclaim_fs_map);
	+	lock_map_release(&reclaim_fs_map);

3. turn lockdep_set/clear_current_reclaim_state() into

	void lockdep_set_current_reclaim_state(gfp_t gfp_mask)
	{
		if (gfp_mask & __GFP_FS)
			lock_map_acquire(&reclaim_fs_map);
	}

	void lockdep_clear_current_reclaim_state(gfp_t gfp_mask)
	{
		if (gfp_mask & __GFP_FS)
			lock_map_release(&reclaim_fs_map);
	}

and now we can remove task_struct->lockdep_reclaim_gfp and all other
RECLAIM_FS hacks in lockdep.c. Plus we can easily extend this logic to
check more GFP_ flags.

No?

Oleg.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-05 16:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-26 16:07 [PATCH 0/2] (Was: BUG_ON in rcu_sync_func triggered) Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-26 16:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] fs/super.c: fix race between freeze_super() and thaw_super() Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-26 16:11   ` Jan Kara
2016-09-26 16:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] fs/super.c: don't fool lockdep in freeze_super() and thaw_super() paths Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-26 16:18   ` Jan Kara
2016-09-26 16:55     ` [PATCH V2 " Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-27  6:51       ` Jan Kara
2016-09-27  7:14         ` Dave Chinner
2016-09-27 17:29         ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-30 17:14           ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-02 21:42             ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-03 16:44               ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 11:43                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 11:48                   ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-06 13:44                     ` Johannes Weiner
2016-10-07 16:52                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 16:58                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 20:03                     ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-05 16:33                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 19:44                   ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-05 16:44                     ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2016-10-06  7:27                       ` Jan Kara
2016-10-06 17:17                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-06 21:59                         ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-07 17:15                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-07 22:52                             ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-09 16:14                               ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-10  1:02                                 ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-13 16:58                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-13 17:10 ` [PATCH 0/2] (Was: BUG_ON in rcu_sync_func triggered) Oleg Nesterov

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=20161005164432.GB15121@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=kernel@kyup.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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).