LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com> To: Wang Long <wanglong19@meituan.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: npiggin@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com> Subject: [PATCH] writeback: safer lock nesting Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 01:03:24 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180406080324.160306-1-gthelen@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <2cb713cd-0b9b-594c-31db-b4582f8ba822@meituan.com> lock_page_memcg()/unlock_page_memcg() use spin_lock_irqsave/restore() if the page's memcg is undergoing move accounting, which occurs when a process leaves its memcg for a new one that has memory.move_charge_at_immigrate set. unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin,end() use spin_lock_irq/spin_unlock_irq() if the given inode is switching writeback domains. Swithces occur when enough writes are issued from a new domain. This existing pattern is thus suspicious: lock_page_memcg(page); unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked); ... unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked); unlock_page_memcg(page); If both inode switch and process memcg migration are both in-flight then unlocked_inode_to_wb_end() will unconditionally enable interrupts while still holding the lock_page_memcg() irq spinlock. This suggests the possibility of deadlock if an interrupt occurs before unlock_page_memcg(). truncate __cancel_dirty_page lock_page_memcg unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin unlocked_inode_to_wb_end <interrupts mistakenly enabled> <interrupt> end_page_writeback test_clear_page_writeback lock_page_memcg <deadlock> unlock_page_memcg Due to configuration limitations this deadlock is not currently possible because we don't mix cgroup writeback (a cgroupv2 feature) and memory.move_charge_at_immigrate (a cgroupv1 feature). If the kernel is hacked to always claim inode switching and memcg moving_account, then this script triggers lockup in less than a minute: cd /mnt/cgroup/memory mkdir a b echo 1 > a/memory.move_charge_at_immigrate echo 1 > b/memory.move_charge_at_immigrate ( echo $BASHPID > a/cgroup.procs while true; do dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/big bs=1M count=256 done ) & while true; do sync done & sleep 1h & SLEEP=$! while true; do echo $SLEEP > a/cgroup.procs echo $SLEEP > b/cgroup.procs done Given the deadlock is not currently possible, it's debatable if there's any reason to modify the kernel. I suggest we should to prevent future surprises. Reported-by: Wang Long <wanglong19@meituan.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com> --- fs/fs-writeback.c | 5 +++-- include/linux/backing-dev.h | 18 ++++++++++++------ mm/page-writeback.c | 15 +++++++++------ 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c index d4d04fee568a..d51bae5a53e2 100644 --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c @@ -746,10 +746,11 @@ int inode_congested(struct inode *inode, int cong_bits) if (inode && inode_to_wb_is_valid(inode)) { struct bdi_writeback *wb; bool locked, congested; + unsigned long flags; - wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked); + wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked, &flags); congested = wb_congested(wb, cong_bits); - unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked); + unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked, flags); return congested; } diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h index 3e4ce54d84ab..6c74b64d6f56 100644 --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h @@ -347,6 +347,7 @@ static inline struct bdi_writeback *inode_to_wb(const struct inode *inode) * unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin - begin unlocked inode wb access transaction * @inode: target inode * @lockedp: temp bool output param, to be passed to the end function + * @flags: saved irq flags, to be passed to the end function * * The caller wants to access the wb associated with @inode but isn't * holding inode->i_lock, mapping->tree_lock or wb->list_lock. This @@ -359,7 +360,8 @@ static inline struct bdi_writeback *inode_to_wb(const struct inode *inode) * disabled on return. */ static inline struct bdi_writeback * -unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(struct inode *inode, bool *lockedp) +unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(struct inode *inode, bool *lockedp, + unsigned long *flags) { rcu_read_lock(); @@ -370,7 +372,7 @@ unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(struct inode *inode, bool *lockedp) *lockedp = smp_load_acquire(&inode->i_state) & I_WB_SWITCH; if (unlikely(*lockedp)) - spin_lock_irq(&inode->i_mapping->tree_lock); + spin_lock_irqsave(&inode->i_mapping->tree_lock, *flags); /* * Protected by either !I_WB_SWITCH + rcu_read_lock() or tree_lock. @@ -383,11 +385,13 @@ unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(struct inode *inode, bool *lockedp) * unlocked_inode_to_wb_end - end inode wb access transaction * @inode: target inode * @locked: *@lockedp from unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin() + * @flags: *@flags from unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin() */ -static inline void unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(struct inode *inode, bool locked) +static inline void unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(struct inode *inode, bool locked, + unsigned long flags) { if (unlikely(locked)) - spin_unlock_irq(&inode->i_mapping->tree_lock); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&inode->i_mapping->tree_lock, flags); rcu_read_unlock(); } @@ -434,12 +438,14 @@ static inline struct bdi_writeback *inode_to_wb(struct inode *inode) } static inline struct bdi_writeback * -unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(struct inode *inode, bool *lockedp) +unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(struct inode *inode, bool *lockedp, + unsigned long *flags) { return inode_to_wb(inode); } -static inline void unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(struct inode *inode, bool locked) +static inline void unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(struct inode *inode, bool locked, + unsigned long flags) { } diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c index 586f31261c83..ca786528c74d 100644 --- a/mm/page-writeback.c +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c @@ -2501,13 +2501,14 @@ void account_page_redirty(struct page *page) if (mapping && mapping_cap_account_dirty(mapping)) { struct inode *inode = mapping->host; struct bdi_writeback *wb; + unsigned long flags; bool locked; - wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked); + wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked, &flags); current->nr_dirtied--; dec_node_page_state(page, NR_DIRTIED); dec_wb_stat(wb, WB_DIRTIED); - unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked); + unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked, flags); } } EXPORT_SYMBOL(account_page_redirty); @@ -2613,15 +2614,16 @@ void __cancel_dirty_page(struct page *page) if (mapping_cap_account_dirty(mapping)) { struct inode *inode = mapping->host; struct bdi_writeback *wb; + unsigned long flags; bool locked; lock_page_memcg(page); - wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked); + wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked, &flags); if (TestClearPageDirty(page)) account_page_cleaned(page, mapping, wb); - unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked); + unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked, flags); unlock_page_memcg(page); } else { ClearPageDirty(page); @@ -2653,6 +2655,7 @@ int clear_page_dirty_for_io(struct page *page) if (mapping && mapping_cap_account_dirty(mapping)) { struct inode *inode = mapping->host; struct bdi_writeback *wb; + unsigned long flags; bool locked; /* @@ -2690,14 +2693,14 @@ int clear_page_dirty_for_io(struct page *page) * always locked coming in here, so we get the desired * exclusion. */ - wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked); + wb = unlocked_inode_to_wb_begin(inode, &locked, &flags); if (TestClearPageDirty(page)) { dec_lruvec_page_state(page, NR_FILE_DIRTY); dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_ZONE_WRITE_PENDING); dec_wb_stat(wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE); ret = 1; } - unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked); + unlocked_inode_to_wb_end(inode, locked, flags); return ret; } return TestClearPageDirty(page); -- 2.17.0.484.g0c8726318c-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-06 8:03 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <157ed606-4a61-508b-d26a-2f5d638f39bb@meituan.com> 2018-04-02 11:50 ` [RFC] Is it correctly that the usage for spin_{lock|unlock}_irq in clear_page_dirty_for_io Wang Long 2018-04-03 12:03 ` Michal Hocko 2018-04-03 23:12 ` Greg Thelen 2018-04-04 6:31 ` Wang Long 2018-04-06 8:03 ` Greg Thelen [this message] 2018-04-06 8:07 ` [PATCH] writeback: safer lock nesting Michal Hocko 2018-04-06 18:49 ` Greg Thelen 2018-04-06 18:55 ` [PATCH v2] " Greg Thelen 2018-04-07 18:56 ` kbuild test robot 2018-04-10 0:59 ` [PATCH v3] " Greg Thelen 2018-04-10 6:33 ` Michal Hocko 2018-04-10 20:48 ` Andrew Morton 2018-04-11 5:50 ` Michal Hocko 2018-04-10 8:14 ` Wang Long 2018-04-11 0:40 ` Greg Thelen 2018-04-10 20:37 ` Andrew Morton 2018-04-11 1:03 ` Greg Thelen 2018-04-11 8:46 ` [PATCH v4] " Greg Thelen 2018-04-10 13:50 ` [PATCH] " Sasha Levin 2018-04-11 2:44 ` Wang Long 2018-04-11 3:13 ` Greg Thelen 2018-04-11 8:45 ` [PATCH for-4.4] " Greg Thelen 2018-04-11 8:50 ` Greg Thelen
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=20180406080324.160306-1-gthelen@google.com \ --to=gthelen@google.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \ --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \ --cc=tj@kernel.org \ --cc=wanglong19@meituan.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: linkBe 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).