[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/1] blk-mq: fix hang caused by freeze/unfreeze sequence

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Tejun Heo <> wrote:
> Hello,
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 01:39:08PM +0200, Roman Pen wrote:
>> Long time ago there was a similar fix proposed by Akinobu Mita[1],
>> but it seems that time everyone decided to fix this subtle race in
>> percpu-refcount and Tejun Heo[2] did an attempt (as I can see that
>> patchset was not applied).
> So, I probably forgot about it while waiting for confirmation of fix.
> Can you please verify that the patchset fixes the issue? I can apply
> the patchset right away.

I have not checked your patchset but according to my understanding
it should not fix *this* issue. What happens here is a wrong order
of invocation of percpu_ref_reinit() and percpu_ref_kill(). So what
was observed is the following:

---------------- -----------------

percpu_ref_kill() << atomic reference does
percpu_ref_reinit() << not guarantee the order

blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait() !! HANG HERE


blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait() on CPU#1 expects percpu-refcount to be
switched to ATOMIC mode (killed), but that does not happen, because
CPU#2 was faster and has been switched percpu-refcount to PERCPU

This race happens inside blk-mq, because invocation of kill/reinit
is controlled by the reference counter, which does not guarantee the
order of the following functions calls (kill/reinit).

So the fix is the same as originally proposed by Akinobu Mita, but
the issue is different.

But of course I can run tests on top of your series, just to verify
that everything goes smoothly and internally percpu-refcount members
are consistent.


 \ /
  Last update: 2016-08-10 22:41    [W:0.074 / U:3.848 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site