From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Changlong Xie <xiecl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
qemu devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
qemu block <qemu-block@nongnu.org>, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>,
Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>,
Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Questions] NBD issue or CoMutex->holder issue?
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:47:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41ca850c-034f-156d-0551-2ecb649c1bb0@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57FCC06A.8060608@cn.fujitsu.com>
On 11/10/2016 12:35, Changlong Xie wrote:
> For nbd client, if request number is large than MAX_NBD_REQUESTS(16), we
> will queue the rest requests into free_sema->queue.
> When nbd client receives one reply, it will unlock free_sema, then pop
> the free_sema->queue head, so set free_sema->holder as
> revelant coroutine.
NBD is using the CoMutex in a way that wasn't anticipated. The simplest
fix is to change it to CoQueue, which is like a condition variable.
Instead of locking if in_flight >= MAX_NBD_REQUESTS - 1, wait on the
queue while in_flight == MAX_NBD_REQUESTS. Instead of unlocking, use
qemu_co_queue_next to wake up one request.
Thanks for the report!
Paolo
> For example if there are N(N=26 and MAX_NBD_REQUESTS=16) nbd write
> requests, so we'll invoke nbd_client_co_pwritev 26 times.
> time request No Actions
> 1 1 in_flight=1, Coroutine=C1
> 2 2 in_flight=2, Coroutine=C2
> ... ...
> 15 15 in_flight=15, Coroutine=C15
> 16 16 in_flight=16, Coroutine=C16,
> free_sema->holder=C16, mutex->locked=true
> 17 17 in_flight=16, Coroutine=C17, queue C17 into
> free_sema->queue
> 18 18 in_flight=16, Coroutine=C18, queue C18 into
> free_sema->queue
> ... ...
> 26 N in_flight=16, Coroutine=C26, queue C26 into
> free_sema->queue
>
> Once nbd client recieves request No.16' reply, we will re-enter request
> C16. It's ok, because it's equal to 'free_sema->holder'.
> time request No Actions
> 27 16 in_flight=15, Coroutine=C16,
> free_sema->holder=C16, mutex->locked=false
>
> Then nbd_coroutine_end invokes qemu_co_mutex_unlock, what will pop
> coroutines from free_sema->queue's head and enter C17. More
> free_sema->holder is C17 now.
> time request No Actions
> 28 17 in_flight=16, Coroutine=C17,
> free_sema->holder=C17, mutex->locked=true
>
> In above scenario, we only recieves request No.16' reply. So as time go
> on, nbd client will almostly recieves replies from requests
> 1 to 15 rather than request 17 who owns C17. In this case, we will
> encounter Assertion "`mutex->holder == self' failed" in nbd_coroutine_end.
> For example, if nbd client recieves request No.15' reply:
> time request No Actions
> 29 15(most case) in_flight=15, Coroutine=C15,
> free_sema->holder=C17, mutex->locked = false
>
> qemu-system-x86_64: util/qemu-coroutine-lock.c:148:
> qemu_co_mutex_unlock: Assertion `mutex->holder == self' failed.
>
> This is introduced by Kevin's patch
> commit 0e438cdc932a785de72166af4641aafa103a6670
> Author: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
> Date: Thu Aug 11 17:45:06 2016 +0200
>
> coroutine: Let CoMutex remember who holds it
>
> In cases of deadlocks, knowing who holds a given CoMutex is really
> helpful for debugging. Keeping the information around doesn't cost much
> and allows us to add another assertion to keep the code correct, so
> let's just add it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
>
> Any ideas? Is it a nbd bug or should we revert commit 0e438cdc?
>
> Thanks
> -Xie
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-11 10:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-11 10:35 [Qemu-devel] [Questions] NBD issue or CoMutex->holder issue? Changlong Xie
2016-10-11 10:47 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2016-10-12 0:42 ` Changlong Xie
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=41ca850c-034f-156d-0551-2ecb649c1bb0@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=wency@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=xiecl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.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).