Re: [PATCH] percpu_ida: Handle out-of-tags gracefully

[Bart Van Assche]

On 03/11/14 14:51, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 03:12:33PM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Avoid that percpu_ida_alloc() hangs or crashes if there are still
>> tags are available. Wait until a tag becomes available instead of
>> giving up when running out of tags temporarily. This patch fixes
>> the following kernel bug:
> 
> Hi Bart,
> 
> Few comments below, but the changelog does not correspond to the
> actual change in 'Wait until a tag becomes available'.
> 
>> ------------[ cut here ]------------
>> kernel BUG at lib/percpu_ida.c:81!
>> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
>> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8120f00e>]  [<ffffffff8120f00e>] percpu_ida_alloc+0x33e/0x370
>> Call Trace:
>>  [<ffffffff811ef95f>] blk_mq_get_tag+0x2f/0x50
>>  [<ffffffff811ed79c>] blk_mq_alloc_rq.isra.17+0x1c/0x90
>>  [<ffffffff811eeb9b>] blk_mq_alloc_request_pinned+0x9b/0x110
>>  [<ffffffff811ef4c6>] blk_mq_make_request+0x426/0x480
>>  [<ffffffff811e28f0>] generic_make_request+0xc0/0x110
>>  [<ffffffff811e29ab>] submit_bio+0x6b/0x140
>>  [<ffffffff8117aabb>] _submit_bh+0x13b/0x220
>>  [<ffffffff8117d70f>] block_read_full_page+0x1ff/0x300
>>  [<ffffffff81181128>] blkdev_readpage+0x18/0x20
>>  [<ffffffff811067b7>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x277/0x280
>>  [<ffffffff81106d1d>] force_page_cache_readahead+0x8d/0xc0
>>  [<ffffffff81106d9b>] page_cache_sync_readahead+0x4b/0x50
>>  [<ffffffff810fdf05>] generic_file_aio_read+0x4c5/0x700
>>  [<ffffffff8118147b>] blkdev_aio_read+0x4b/0x70
>>  [<ffffffff8114a28a>] do_sync_read+0x5a/0x90
>>  [<ffffffff8114a8cb>] vfs_read+0x9b/0x160
>>  [<ffffffff8114b389>] SyS_read+0x49/0xa0
>>  [<ffffffff81416049>] tracesys+0xd0/0xd5
>> ---[ end trace cdd1a8a7968266cf ]---
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@xxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Kent Overstreet <kmo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
>> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Mike Christie <michaelc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  lib/percpu_ida.c | 5 ++++-
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/percpu_ida.c b/lib/percpu_ida.c
>> index 93d145e..170d27c 100644
>> --- a/lib/percpu_ida.c
>> +++ b/lib/percpu_ida.c
>> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ static inline void steal_tags(struct percpu_ida *pool,
>>  		if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) {
>>  			cpu = cpumask_first(&pool->cpus_have_tags);
>>  			if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids)
>> -				BUG();
>> +				break;
> 
> I assume the BUG() above hits? If so, I am failing to understand how
> the code gets here. Mind elaborate?

Hello Alexander,

You are correct, the BUG() mentioned in the call stack in the
description of this patch does indeed correspond with the BUG()
statement in the above code. That BUG() was encountered while testing
the scsi-mq patch series with a workload with a large queue depth. I
think the fact that I hit that BUG() statement means that my workload
was queueing requests faster than these were processed by the SCSI LLD
and hence that percpu_ida_alloc() ran out of tags.

>>  		}
>>  
>>  		pool->cpu_last_stolen = cpu;
>> @@ -189,6 +189,9 @@ int percpu_ida_alloc(struct percpu_ida *pool, int state)
>>  		spin_unlock(&pool->lock);
>>  		local_irq_restore(flags);
>>  
>> +		if (tags->nr_free)
>> +			wake_up(&pool->wait);
>> +
> 
> How 'tags->nr_free' could be checked out of locks?
> Why waking up another thread instead of returning the tag on this CPU?
> Why 'percpu_max_size' threshold is ignored?

Sorry but I'm not sure how much experience you have with kernel coding ?
There are several examples in the Linux kernel of kernel drivers where
variables that are shared over CPU's are on purpose read without first
taking the lock that protects these variables. Students are thought at
the university that all accesses of shared variables should be protected
via locking. In the Linux kernel however it is common practice to read a
shared variable without locking if the code that does this will work
fine if such a read returns an previous value of that variable instead
of the latest value.

> Anyway, IMHO the above BUG() indicates a problem elsewhere.

Sorry but I disagree. percpu_ida_alloc() should either return an error
code or keep waiting when out of tags. Invoking BUG() when out of tags
is wrong.

Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/