by Angus Chen

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] virtio_blk: should not use IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED in init_rq

Hi.
I use the patch to workaround irq resource exhausted.
Although mst helped me to fix the intx irq resource in virtio_pci_common.c,
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/virtualization/[email protected]/

As mst said,the bug will still be there.
The dpu can provide more than 512 virtio_blk in one machine.
Could you pls provide more suggestion?

Thanks.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Angus Chen
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 11:25 AM
> To: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; Liming Wu <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] virtio_blk: should not use IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED in
> init_rq
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 4:47 AM
> > To: Angus Chen <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; Liming Wu <[email protected]>;
> > [email protected]; Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] virtio_blk: should not use IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED
> in
> > init_rq
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 11:48:54AM +0800, Angus Chen wrote:
> > > The background is that we use dpu in cloud computing,the arch is x86,80
> > > cores.We will have a lots of virtio devices,like 512 or more.
> > > When we probe about 200 virtio_blk devices,it will fail and
> > > the stack is print as follows:
> > >
> > > [25338.485128] virtio-pci 0000:b3:00.0: virtio_pci: leaving for legacy driver
> > > [25338.496174] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 0. 00000080 (virtio418) vs.
> > 00015a00 (timer)
> > > [25338.503822] CPU: 20 PID: 5431 Comm: kworker/20:0 Kdump: loaded
> > Tainted: G OE --------- - - 4.18.0-305.30.1.el8.x86_64
> > > [25338.516403] Hardware name: Inspur NF5280M5/YZMB-00882-10E, BIOS
> > 4.1.21 08/25/2021
> > > [25338.523881] Workqueue: events work_for_cpu_fn
> > > [25338.528235] Call Trace:
> > > [25338.530687] dump_stack+0x5c/0x80
> > > [25338.534000] __setup_irq.cold.53+0x7c/0xd3
> > > [25338.538098] request_threaded_irq+0xf5/0x160
> > > [25338.542371] vp_find_vqs+0xc7/0x190
> > > [25338.545866] init_vq+0x17c/0x2e0 [virtio_blk]
> > > [25338.550223] ? ncpus_cmp_func+0x10/0x10
> > > [25338.554061] virtblk_probe+0xe6/0x8a0 [virtio_blk]
> > > [25338.558846] virtio_dev_probe+0x158/0x1f0
> > > [25338.562861] really_probe+0x255/0x4a0
> > > [25338.566524] ? __driver_attach_async_helper+0x90/0x90
> > > [25338.571567] driver_probe_device+0x49/0xc0
> > > [25338.575660] bus_for_each_drv+0x79/0xc0
> > > [25338.579499] __device_attach+0xdc/0x160
> > > [25338.583337] bus_probe_device+0x9d/0xb0
> > > [25338.587167] device_add+0x418/0x780
> > > [25338.590654] register_virtio_device+0x9e/0xe0
> > > [25338.595011] virtio_pci_probe+0xb3/0x140
> > > [25338.598941] local_pci_probe+0x41/0x90
> > > [25338.602689] work_for_cpu_fn+0x16/0x20
> > > [25338.606443] process_one_work+0x1a7/0x360
> > > [25338.610456] ? create_worker+0x1a0/0x1a0
> > > [25338.614381] worker_thread+0x1cf/0x390
> > > [25338.618132] ? create_worker+0x1a0/0x1a0
> > > [25338.622051] kthread+0x116/0x130
> > > [25338.625283] ? kthread_flush_work_fn+0x10/0x10
> > > [25338.629731] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40
> > > [25338.633395] virtio_blk: probe of virtio418 failed with error -16
> > >
> > > After I did some work of this stack,took stap and crash to get more
> > > information,I found that the auto irq_affinity affect this.
> > > When "vp_find_vqs" call "vp_find_vqs_msix" failed,it will be go back
> > > to call vp_find_vqs_msix again with ctx be false, and when it failed again,
> > > we will call vp_find_vqs_intx,if the vp_dev->pci_dev->irq is zero,
> > > we will get a backtrace like above.
> > >
> > > The log :
> > > "genirq: Flags mismatch irq 0. 00000080 (virtio418) vs. 00015a00 (timer)"
> > > was print because of the irq 0 is used by timer exclusive,and when
> > > vp_find_vqs called vp_find_vqs_msix and return false twice,then it will
> > > call vp_find_vqs_intx for the last try.
> > > Because vp_dev->pci_dev->irq is zero,so it will be request irq 0 with
> > > flag IRQF_SHARED.
> >
> > First this is a bug. We can fix that so it will fail more cleanly.
> >
> > We should check pci_dev->pin and if 0 do not try to use INT#x
> > at all.
> Yes, I will send a patch for this only.
> Thank you.
> > It will still fail, just with a nicer backtrace.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > without config CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_DEBUGFS,
> > > I found that we called vp_find_vqs_msix failed twice because of
> > > the irq resource was exhausted.
> >
> > I see. I don't know enough about how this work, but roughly
> > I think the issue is at a high level
> >
> > - because of auto affinity, we try to reserve an interrupt on all CPUs
> > - as there are 512 devices with a single vector per VQ we would
> > have no issue as they would be spread between CPUs,
> > but allocating on all CPUs fails.
> >
> >
> > I don't think the issue should be fixed at blk level - it is not
> > blk specifix - but yes this looks like a problem.
> > Christoph, any idea?
> >
> >
> >
> > > crash> irq_domain.name,parent 0xffff9bff87d4dec0
> > > name = 0xffff9bff87c1fd60 "INTEL-IR-MSI-1-2"
> > > parent = 0xffff9bff87400000
> > > crash> irq_domain.name,parent 0xffff9bff87400000
> > > name = 0xffff9bff87c24300 "INTEL-IR-1"
> > > parent = 0xffff9bff87c6c900
> > > crash> irq_domain.name,parent 0xffff9bff87c6c900
> > > name = 0xffff9bff87c3ecd0 "VECTOR"
> > > parent = 0x0----------------------the highest level
> > >
> > > and stap irq_matrix_alloc_managed get return value -ENOSPC.
> > >
> > > When no virtio_blk device probe,the vctor_matrix is:
> > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > $1 = {
> > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > global_available = 15593,
> > > global_reserved = 149,
> > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > total_allocated = 409,
> > > online_maps = 80,
> > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > scratch_map = {1161063342014463, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > }
> > >
> > > When the dump stack occur,the vector_matrix of system is exhausted.
> > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > $82 = {
> > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > global_available = 0,//caq:irq left
> > > global_reserved = 151,
> > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > total_allocated = 1922,//caq:irq that allocated
> > > online_maps = 80,
> > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > scratch_map = {18446744069952503807, 18446744073709551615,
> > > 18446744073709551615, 18446735277616529407, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > }
> > >
> > > And we tested the virtio_blk device which request irq success,
> > > we found that in a system with 80 cores and two numa ,one
> > > virtio_blk device with just two data queues consume 81 irqs capacity,
> > > Although it just only three irqs in /proc/interrupt,80 irqs capacity
> > > is effected by function "irq_build_affinity_masks" with 2*40.
> > >
> > > before one virtio_blk device hotplug out:
> > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > $2 = {
> > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > global_available = 15215,
> > > global_reserved = 150,
> > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > total_allocated = 553,
> > > online_maps = 80,
> > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > scratch_map = {1179746449752063, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200, 0, 0,
> 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200, 0, 0,
> 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > }
> > >
> > > after one virtio_blk device hotplug out:
> > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > $3 = {
> > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > global_available = 15296,---it increase 81,include 1 config irq.
> > > global_reserved = 150,
> > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > total_allocated = 550,------it just decrease 3.
> > > online_maps = 80,
> > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > scratch_map = {481036337152, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200, 0, 0,
> 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > }
> > >
> > > We test the new kernel also,it occur the same result.
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 0. 00000080 (virtio608)
> > vs. 00015a00 (timer)
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] CPU: 0 PID: 5749 Comm: kworker/0:0 Kdump:
> > loaded Tainted: G W OE 6.0.0-rc6+ #5
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] Hardware name: Inspur
> > NF5280M5/YZMB-00882-10E, BIOS 4.1.19 06/16/2021
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] Workqueue: events work_for_cpu_fn
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] Call Trace:
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] <TASK>
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] dump_stack_lvl+0x33/0x46
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __setup_irq+0x705/0x770
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] request_threaded_irq+0x109/0x170
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] vp_find_vqs+0xc4/0x190
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] init_vqs+0x348/0x580 [virtio_net]
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] virtnet_probe+0x54d/0xa80 [virtio_net]
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] virtio_dev_probe+0x19c/0x240
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] really_probe+0x106/0x3e0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? pm_runtime_barrier+0x4f/0xa0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __driver_probe_device+0x79/0x170
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __device_attach_driver+0x85/0x110
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? driver_allows_async_probing+0x60/0x60
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? driver_allows_async_probing+0x60/0x60
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] bus_for_each_drv+0x67/0xb0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __device_attach+0xe9/0x1b0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] bus_probe_device+0x87/0xa0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] device_add+0x59f/0x950
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? dev_set_name+0x4e/0x70
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] register_virtio_device+0xac/0xf0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] virtio_pci_probe+0x101/0x170
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] local_pci_probe+0x42/0xa0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] work_for_cpu_fn+0x13/0x20
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] process_one_work+0x1c2/0x3d0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? process_one_work+0x3d0/0x3d0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] worker_thread+0x1b9/0x360
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? process_one_work+0x3d0/0x3d0
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] kthread+0xe6/0x110
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] </TASK>
> > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:43 2022] virtio_net: probe of virtio608 failed with error -16
> > >
> > > Fixes: ad71473d9c43 ("virtio_blk: use virtio IRQ affinity")
> > > Signed-off-by: Angus Chen <[email protected]>
> > > Tested-by: Liming Wu <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/block/virtio_blk.c | 3 +--
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > > index a8bcf3f664af..075de30a9bb4 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > > @@ -513,7 +513,6 @@ static int init_vq(struct virtio_blk *vblk)
> > > struct virtqueue **vqs;
> > > unsigned short num_vqs;
> > > struct virtio_device *vdev = vblk->vdev;
> > > - struct irq_affinity desc = { 0, };
> > >
> > > err = virtio_cread_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ,
> > > struct virtio_blk_config, num_queues,
> > > @@ -548,7 +547,7 @@ static int init_vq(struct virtio_blk *vblk)
> > > }
> > >
> > > /* Discover virtqueues and write information to configuration. */
> > > - err = virtio_find_vqs(vdev, num_vqs, vqs, callbacks, names, &desc);
> > > + err = virtio_find_vqs(vdev, num_vqs, vqs, callbacks, names, NULL);
> > > if (err)
> > > goto out;
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1

2022-11-13 13:57:20

by Michael S. Tsirkin

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] virtio_blk: should not use IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED in init_rq

On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 03:28:37AM +0000, Angus Chen wrote:
> Hi.
> I use the patch to workaround irq resource exhausted.
> Although mst helped me to fix the intx irq resource in virtio_pci_common.c,
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/virtualization/[email protected]/
>
> As mst said,the bug will still be there.
> The dpu can provide more than 512 virtio_blk in one machine.
> Could you pls provide more suggestion?
>
> Thanks.

I think you need to write a new message documenting the
behaviour on new kernels (with the crash fixed).

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Angus Chen
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 11:25 AM
> > To: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; Liming Wu <[email protected]>;
> > [email protected]; Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] virtio_blk: should not use IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED in
> > init_rq
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 4:47 AM
> > > To: Angus Chen <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; Liming Wu <[email protected]>;
> > > [email protected]; Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] virtio_blk: should not use IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED
> > in
> > > init_rq
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 11:48:54AM +0800, Angus Chen wrote:
> > > > The background is that we use dpu in cloud computing,the arch is x86,80
> > > > cores.We will have a lots of virtio devices,like 512 or more.
> > > > When we probe about 200 virtio_blk devices,it will fail and
> > > > the stack is print as follows:
> > > >
> > > > [25338.485128] virtio-pci 0000:b3:00.0: virtio_pci: leaving for legacy driver
> > > > [25338.496174] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 0. 00000080 (virtio418) vs.
> > > 00015a00 (timer)
> > > > [25338.503822] CPU: 20 PID: 5431 Comm: kworker/20:0 Kdump: loaded
> > > Tainted: G OE --------- - - 4.18.0-305.30.1.el8.x86_64
> > > > [25338.516403] Hardware name: Inspur NF5280M5/YZMB-00882-10E, BIOS
> > > 4.1.21 08/25/2021
> > > > [25338.523881] Workqueue: events work_for_cpu_fn
> > > > [25338.528235] Call Trace:
> > > > [25338.530687] dump_stack+0x5c/0x80
> > > > [25338.534000] __setup_irq.cold.53+0x7c/0xd3
> > > > [25338.538098] request_threaded_irq+0xf5/0x160
> > > > [25338.542371] vp_find_vqs+0xc7/0x190
> > > > [25338.545866] init_vq+0x17c/0x2e0 [virtio_blk]
> > > > [25338.550223] ? ncpus_cmp_func+0x10/0x10
> > > > [25338.554061] virtblk_probe+0xe6/0x8a0 [virtio_blk]
> > > > [25338.558846] virtio_dev_probe+0x158/0x1f0
> > > > [25338.562861] really_probe+0x255/0x4a0
> > > > [25338.566524] ? __driver_attach_async_helper+0x90/0x90
> > > > [25338.571567] driver_probe_device+0x49/0xc0
> > > > [25338.575660] bus_for_each_drv+0x79/0xc0
> > > > [25338.579499] __device_attach+0xdc/0x160
> > > > [25338.583337] bus_probe_device+0x9d/0xb0
> > > > [25338.587167] device_add+0x418/0x780
> > > > [25338.590654] register_virtio_device+0x9e/0xe0
> > > > [25338.595011] virtio_pci_probe+0xb3/0x140
> > > > [25338.598941] local_pci_probe+0x41/0x90
> > > > [25338.602689] work_for_cpu_fn+0x16/0x20
> > > > [25338.606443] process_one_work+0x1a7/0x360
> > > > [25338.610456] ? create_worker+0x1a0/0x1a0
> > > > [25338.614381] worker_thread+0x1cf/0x390
> > > > [25338.618132] ? create_worker+0x1a0/0x1a0
> > > > [25338.622051] kthread+0x116/0x130
> > > > [25338.625283] ? kthread_flush_work_fn+0x10/0x10
> > > > [25338.629731] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40
> > > > [25338.633395] virtio_blk: probe of virtio418 failed with error -16
> > > >
> > > > After I did some work of this stack,took stap and crash to get more
> > > > information,I found that the auto irq_affinity affect this.
> > > > When "vp_find_vqs" call "vp_find_vqs_msix" failed,it will be go back
> > > > to call vp_find_vqs_msix again with ctx be false, and when it failed again,
> > > > we will call vp_find_vqs_intx,if the vp_dev->pci_dev->irq is zero,
> > > > we will get a backtrace like above.
> > > >
> > > > The log :
> > > > "genirq: Flags mismatch irq 0. 00000080 (virtio418) vs. 00015a00 (timer)"
> > > > was print because of the irq 0 is used by timer exclusive,and when
> > > > vp_find_vqs called vp_find_vqs_msix and return false twice,then it will
> > > > call vp_find_vqs_intx for the last try.
> > > > Because vp_dev->pci_dev->irq is zero,so it will be request irq 0 with
> > > > flag IRQF_SHARED.
> > >
> > > First this is a bug. We can fix that so it will fail more cleanly.
> > >
> > > We should check pci_dev->pin and if 0 do not try to use INT#x
> > > at all.
> > Yes, I will send a patch for this only.
> > Thank you.
> > > It will still fail, just with a nicer backtrace.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > without config CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_DEBUGFS,
> > > > I found that we called vp_find_vqs_msix failed twice because of
> > > > the irq resource was exhausted.
> > >
> > > I see. I don't know enough about how this work, but roughly
> > > I think the issue is at a high level
> > >
> > > - because of auto affinity, we try to reserve an interrupt on all CPUs
> > > - as there are 512 devices with a single vector per VQ we would
> > > have no issue as they would be spread between CPUs,
> > > but allocating on all CPUs fails.
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't think the issue should be fixed at blk level - it is not
> > > blk specifix - but yes this looks like a problem.
> > > Christoph, any idea?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > crash> irq_domain.name,parent 0xffff9bff87d4dec0
> > > > name = 0xffff9bff87c1fd60 "INTEL-IR-MSI-1-2"
> > > > parent = 0xffff9bff87400000
> > > > crash> irq_domain.name,parent 0xffff9bff87400000
> > > > name = 0xffff9bff87c24300 "INTEL-IR-1"
> > > > parent = 0xffff9bff87c6c900
> > > > crash> irq_domain.name,parent 0xffff9bff87c6c900
> > > > name = 0xffff9bff87c3ecd0 "VECTOR"
> > > > parent = 0x0----------------------the highest level
> > > >
> > > > and stap irq_matrix_alloc_managed get return value -ENOSPC.
> > > >
> > > > When no virtio_blk device probe,the vctor_matrix is:
> > > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > > $1 = {
> > > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > > global_available = 15593,
> > > > global_reserved = 149,
> > > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > > total_allocated = 409,
> > > > online_maps = 80,
> > > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > > scratch_map = {1161063342014463, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > When the dump stack occur,the vector_matrix of system is exhausted.
> > > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > > $82 = {
> > > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > > global_available = 0,//caq:irq left
> > > > global_reserved = 151,
> > > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > > total_allocated = 1922,//caq:irq that allocated
> > > > online_maps = 80,
> > > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > > scratch_map = {18446744069952503807, 18446744073709551615,
> > > > 18446744073709551615, 18446735277616529407, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > And we tested the virtio_blk device which request irq success,
> > > > we found that in a system with 80 cores and two numa ,one
> > > > virtio_blk device with just two data queues consume 81 irqs capacity,
> > > > Although it just only three irqs in /proc/interrupt,80 irqs capacity
> > > > is effected by function "irq_build_affinity_masks" with 2*40.
> > > >
> > > > before one virtio_blk device hotplug out:
> > > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > > $2 = {
> > > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > > global_available = 15215,
> > > > global_reserved = 150,
> > > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > > total_allocated = 553,
> > > > online_maps = 80,
> > > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > > scratch_map = {1179746449752063, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200, 0, 0,
> > 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200, 0, 0,
> > 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > after one virtio_blk device hotplug out:
> > > > crash> p *vector_matrix
> > > > $3 = {
> > > > matrix_bits = 256,
> > > > alloc_start = 32,
> > > > alloc_end = 236,
> > > > alloc_size = 204,
> > > > global_available = 15296,---it increase 81,include 1 config irq.
> > > > global_reserved = 150,
> > > > systembits_inalloc = 3,
> > > > total_allocated = 550,------it just decrease 3.
> > > > online_maps = 80,
> > > > maps = 0x2ff20,
> > > > scratch_map = {481036337152, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0},
> > > > system_map = {1125904739729407, 0, 1, 18446726481523507200, 0, 0,
> > 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
> > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > We test the new kernel also,it occur the same result.
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 0. 00000080 (virtio608)
> > > vs. 00015a00 (timer)
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] CPU: 0 PID: 5749 Comm: kworker/0:0 Kdump:
> > > loaded Tainted: G W OE 6.0.0-rc6+ #5
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] Hardware name: Inspur
> > > NF5280M5/YZMB-00882-10E, BIOS 4.1.19 06/16/2021
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] Workqueue: events work_for_cpu_fn
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] Call Trace:
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] <TASK>
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] dump_stack_lvl+0x33/0x46
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __setup_irq+0x705/0x770
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] request_threaded_irq+0x109/0x170
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] vp_find_vqs+0xc4/0x190
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] init_vqs+0x348/0x580 [virtio_net]
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] virtnet_probe+0x54d/0xa80 [virtio_net]
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] virtio_dev_probe+0x19c/0x240
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] really_probe+0x106/0x3e0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? pm_runtime_barrier+0x4f/0xa0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __driver_probe_device+0x79/0x170
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __device_attach_driver+0x85/0x110
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? driver_allows_async_probing+0x60/0x60
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? driver_allows_async_probing+0x60/0x60
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] bus_for_each_drv+0x67/0xb0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] __device_attach+0xe9/0x1b0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] bus_probe_device+0x87/0xa0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] device_add+0x59f/0x950
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? dev_set_name+0x4e/0x70
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] register_virtio_device+0xac/0xf0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] virtio_pci_probe+0x101/0x170
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] local_pci_probe+0x42/0xa0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] work_for_cpu_fn+0x13/0x20
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] process_one_work+0x1c2/0x3d0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? process_one_work+0x3d0/0x3d0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] worker_thread+0x1b9/0x360
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? process_one_work+0x3d0/0x3d0
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] kthread+0xe6/0x110
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:42 2022] </TASK>
> > > > [Fri Sep 23 04:51:43 2022] virtio_net: probe of virtio608 failed with error -16
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: ad71473d9c43 ("virtio_blk: use virtio IRQ affinity")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Angus Chen <[email protected]>
> > > > Tested-by: Liming Wu <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/block/virtio_blk.c | 3 +--
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > > > index a8bcf3f664af..075de30a9bb4 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > > > @@ -513,7 +513,6 @@ static int init_vq(struct virtio_blk *vblk)
> > > > struct virtqueue **vqs;
> > > > unsigned short num_vqs;
> > > > struct virtio_device *vdev = vblk->vdev;
> > > > - struct irq_affinity desc = { 0, };
> > > >
> > > > err = virtio_cread_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ,
> > > > struct virtio_blk_config, num_queues,
> > > > @@ -548,7 +547,7 @@ static int init_vq(struct virtio_blk *vblk)
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /* Discover virtqueues and write information to configuration. */
> > > > - err = virtio_find_vqs(vdev, num_vqs, vqs, callbacks, names, &desc);
> > > > + err = virtio_find_vqs(vdev, num_vqs, vqs, callbacks, names, NULL);
> > > > if (err)
> > > > goto out;
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 2.17.1
>