lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCHv5 3/5] ext4: mballoc: Introduce pcpu seqcnt for freeing PA to improve ENOSPC handling
From
Date
Hi Marek,

On 6/3/20 12:18 PM, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hi Ritesh,
>
> On 20.05.2020 08:40, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>> There could be a race in function ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations()
>> where the 1st thread may iterate through group's bb_prealloc_list and
>> remove all the PAs and add to function's local list head.
>> Now if the 2nd thread comes in to discard the group preallocations,
>> it will see that the group->bb_prealloc_list is empty and will return 0.
>>
>> Consider for a case where we have less number of groups
>> (for e.g. just group 0),
>> this may even return an -ENOSPC error from ext4_mb_new_blocks()
>> (where we call for ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations()).
>> But that is wrong, since 2nd thread should have waited for 1st thread
>> to release all the PAs and should have retried for allocation.
>> Since 1st thread was anyway going to discard the PAs.
>>
>> The algorithm using this percpu seq counter goes below:
>> 1. We sample the percpu discard_pa_seq counter before trying for block
>> allocation in ext4_mb_new_blocks().
>> 2. We increment this percpu discard_pa_seq counter when we either allocate
>> or free these blocks i.e. while marking those blocks as used/free in
>> mb_mark_used()/mb_free_blocks().
>> 3. We also increment this percpu seq counter when we successfully identify
>> that the bb_prealloc_list is not empty and hence proceed for discarding
>> of those PAs inside ext4_mb_discard_group_preallocations().
>>
>> Now to make sure that the regular fast path of block allocation is not
>> affected, as a small optimization we only sample the percpu seq counter
>> on that cpu. Only when the block allocation fails and when freed blocks
>> found were 0, that is when we sample percpu seq counter for all cpus using
>> below function ext4_get_discard_pa_seq_sum(). This happens after making
>> sure that all the PAs on grp->bb_prealloc_list got freed or if it's empty.
>>
>> It can be well argued that why don't just check for grp->bb_free to
>> see if there are any free blocks to be allocated. So here are the two
>> concerns which were discussed:-
>>
>> 1. If for some reason the blocks available in the group are not
>> appropriate for allocation logic (say for e.g.
>> EXT4_MB_HINT_GOAL_ONLY, although this is not yet implemented), then
>> the retry logic may result into infinte looping since grp->bb_free is
>> non-zero.
>>
>> 2. Also before preallocation was clubbed with block allocation with the
>> same ext4_lock_group() held, there were lot of races where grp->bb_free
>> could not be reliably relied upon.
>> Due to above, this patch considers discard_pa_seq logic to determine if
>> we should retry for block allocation. Say if there are are n threads
>> trying for block allocation and none of those could allocate or discard
>> any of the blocks, then all of those n threads will fail the block
>> allocation and return -ENOSPC error. (Since the seq counter for all of
>> those will match as no block allocation/discard was done during that
>> duration).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
>
> This patch landed in yesterday's linux-next and causes following
> WARNING/BUG on various Samsung Exynos-based boards:
>
>  BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: logsave/552
>  caller is ext4_mb_new_blocks+0x404/0x1300

Yes, this is being discussed in the community.
I have submitted a patch which should help fix this warning msg.
Feel free to give this a try on your setup.

https://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=159110574414645&w=2


-ritesh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-03 12:10    [W:0.142 / U:0.756 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site