On Tue, Nov 21 2017 at  8:21pm -0500,
Mikulas Patocka [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Mike Snitzer wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Nov 21 2017 at  4:23pm -0500,
Mikulas Patocka [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

This is not correct:

   2206 static void dm_wq_work(struct work_struct *work)
   2207 {
   2208         struct mapped_device *md = container_of(work, struct mapped_device, work);
   2209         struct bio *bio;
   2210         int srcu_idx;
   2211         struct dm_table *map;
   2212
   2213         if (!bio_list_empty(&md->rescued)) {
   2214                 struct bio_list list;
   2215                 spin_lock_irq(&md->deferred_lock);
   2216                 list = md->rescued;
   2217                 bio_list_init(&md->rescued);
   2218                 spin_unlock_irq(&md->deferred_lock);
   2219                 while ((bio = bio_list_pop(&list)))
   2220                         generic_make_request(bio);
   2221         }
   2222
   2223         map = dm_get_live_table(md, &srcu_idx);
   2224
   2225         while (!test_bit(DMF_BLOCK_IO_FOR_SUSPEND, &md->flags)) {
   2226                 spin_lock_irq(&md->deferred_lock);
   2227                 bio = bio_list_pop(&md->deferred);
   2228                 spin_unlock_irq(&md->deferred_lock);
   2229
   2230                 if (!bio)
   2231                         break;
   2232
   2233                 if (dm_request_based(md))
   2234                         generic_make_request(bio);
   2235                 else
   2236                         __split_and_process_bio(md, map, bio);
   2237         }
   2238
   2239         dm_put_live_table(md, srcu_idx);
   2240 }

You can see that if we are in dm_wq_work in __split_and_process_bio, we 
will not process md->rescued list.

Can you elaborate further?  We cannot be "in dm_wq_work in
__split_and_process_bio" simultaneously.  Do you mean as a side-effect
of scheduling away from __split_and_process_bio?

The more detail you can share the better.

Suppose this scenario:

* dm_wq_work calls __split_and_process_bio

Right, I later realized this was the call chain you were referring to.
Not sure how I missed it the first time around.

* __split_and_process_bio eventually reaches the function snapshot_map
* snapshot_map attempts to take the snapshot lock

* the snapshot lock could be released only if some bios submitted by the 
snapshot driver to the underlying device complete
* the bios submitted to the underlying device were already offloaded by 
some other task and they are waiting on the list md->rescued
* the bios waiting on md->rescued are not processed, because dm_wq_work is 
blocked in snapshot_map (called from __split_and_process_bio)

SO you're saying the case that Neil doesn't think should happen:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/658
...can happen.

quoted

quoted

The processing of md->rescued is also wrong - bios for different devices 
must be offloaded to different helper threads, so that processing a bio 
for a lower device doesn't depend on processing a bio for a higher device. 
If you offload all the bios on current->bio_list to the same thread, the 
bios still depend on each other and the deadlock will still happen.

Commit 325738403 ("dm: revise 'rescue' strategy for bio-based bioset
allocations") speaks to this with:

"Note that only current->bio_list[0] is offloaded.  current->bio_list[1]
contains bios that were scheduled *before* the current one started, so
they must have been submitted from higher up the stack, and we cannot be
waiting for them here (thanks to the "dm: ensure bio submission follows
a depth-first tree walk" commit).  Also, we now rescue *all* bios on the
list as there is nothing to be gained by being more selective."

I think you are right - if we only offload current->bio_list[0], then 
mixing of dependent bios on the offloaded list won't happen.

quoted

And again: this patchset passes your dm-snapshot deadlock test.  Is
that test somehow lacking?

With your patchset, the deadlock would happen only if bios are queued on 
&md->deferred - and that happens only in case of resume or if we are 
processing REQ_PREFLUSH with non-zero data size.

So, the simple test that I wrote doesn't trigger it, but a more complex 
test involving REQ_PREFLUSH could.

Makes sense.  But I need to think further about _why_ bios submitted to
the snapshot driver's underlying device would end up on md->rescued
(like you suggested above).  Again, Neil thinks it not possible.  Neil
said:
"they will not be recursive calls, so nothing will be added to
current->bio_list[0] and nothing will be moved to md->rescued.  Each
generic_make_request() will completely submit the request in the lower
level devel."

Mike