Thread (24 messages) 24 messages, 2 authors, 2018-01-26

Re: [PATCH v3 02/13] bcache: properly set task state in bch_writeback_thread()

From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Date: 2018-01-16 09:02:29
Also in: linux-bcache

On 01/14/2018 03:42 PM, Coly Li wrote:
Kernel thread routine bch_writeback_thread() has the following code block,

447         down_write(&dc->writeback_lock);
448~450     if (check conditions) {
451                 up_write(&dc->writeback_lock);
452                 set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
453
454                 if (kthread_should_stop())
455                         return 0;
456
457                 schedule();
458                 continue;
459         }

If condition check is true, its task state is set to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
and call schedule() to wait for others to wake up it.

There are 2 issues in current code,
1, Task state is set to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE after the condition checks, if
   another process changes the condition and call wake_up_process(dc->
   writeback_thread), then at line 452 task state is set back to
   TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, the writeback kernel thread will lose a chance to be
   waken up.
2, At line 454 if kthread_should_stop() is true, writeback kernel thread
   will return to kernel/kthread.c:kthread() with TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and
   call do_exit(). It is not good to enter do_exit() with task state
   TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, in following code path might_sleep() is called and a
   warning message is reported by __might_sleep(): "WARNING: do not call
   blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING; state=1 set at [xxxx]".

For the first issue, task state should be set before condition checks.
Ineed because dc->writeback_lock is required when modifying all the
conditions, calling set_current_state() inside code block where dc->
writeback_lock is hold is safe. But this is quite implicit, so I still move
set_current_state() before all the condition checks.

For the second issue, frankley speaking it does not hurt when kernel thread
exits with TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state, but this warning message scares users,
makes them feel there might be something risky with bcache and hurt their
data.  Setting task state to TASK_RUNNING before returning fixes this
problem.

Changelog:
v2: fix the race issue in v1 patch.
v1: initial buggy fix.

Signed-off-by: Coly Li <redacted>
Cc: Michael Lyle <redacted>
Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: Junhui Tang <redacted>
---
 drivers/md/bcache/writeback.c | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		   Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@suse.de			               +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help