From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>,
jack@suse.cz, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com,
qiulaibin@huawei.com
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
yukuai3@huawei.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] blk-mq: fix potential io hang by wrong 'wake_batch'
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 11:41:51 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6b2fc148-3bf9-83d5-fd5e-242ff51c9c96@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230609085130.2320859-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
On 6/9/23 2:51?AM, Yu Kuai wrote:
> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
>
> In __blk_mq_tag_busy/idle(), updating 'active_queues' and calculating
> 'wake_batch' is not atomic:
>
> t1: t2:
> _blk_mq_tag_busy blk_mq_tag_busy
> inc active_queues
> // assume 1->2
> inc active_queues
> // 2 -> 3
> blk_mq_update_wake_batch
> // calculate based on 3
> blk_mq_update_wake_batch
> /* calculate based on 2, while active_queues is actually 3. */
>
> Fix this problem by protecting them wih 'tags->lock', this is not a hot
> path, so performance should not be concerned.
>
> Fixes: 180dccb0dba4 ("blk-mq: fix tag_get wait task can't be awakened")
> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
> ---
> block/blk-mq-tag.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq-tag.c b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> index dfd81cab5788..43fe523f39c7 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> @@ -55,9 +55,10 @@ void __blk_mq_tag_busy(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
> return;
> }
>
> + spin_lock_irq(&hctx->tags->lock);
> users = atomic_inc_return(&hctx->tags->active_queues);
> -
> blk_mq_update_wake_batch(hctx->tags, users);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&hctx->tags->lock);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -90,9 +91,10 @@ void __blk_mq_tag_idle(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
> return;
> }
>
> + spin_lock_irq(&tags->lock);
> users = atomic_dec_return(&tags->active_queues);
> -
> blk_mq_update_wake_batch(tags, users);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&tags->lock);
>
> blk_mq_tag_wakeup_all(tags, false);
> }
From a quick look, these are the only manipulators of active_queues.
If we're under the tags lock, why do they still need to be atomics?
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-09 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-09 8:51 [PATCH -next] blk-mq: fix potential io hang by wrong 'wake_batch' Yu Kuai
2023-06-09 17:41 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2023-06-10 2:26 ` Yu Kuai
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=6b2fc148-3bf9-83d5-fd5e-242ff51c9c96@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qiulaibin@huawei.com \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).