Hi Jens,
I'm writing this short cover letter to hopefully help you decide what
to do with this patch, in this late phase of the development
cycle. This patch fixes a bug causing kernel crashes for at least
one year. Crashes apparently affect only a minority of users, but are
systematic for them (a crash every few tens of minutes for some).
Thanks,
Paolo
Paolo Valente (1):
block, bfq: don't change ioprio class for a bfq_queue on a service
tree
block/bfq-iosched.c | 14 ++++++++++----
block/bfq-iosched.h | 3 ++-
block/bfq-wf2q.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
--
2.10.0
On each deactivation or re-scheduling (after being served) of a
bfq_queue, BFQ invokes the function __bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(),
to perform pending updates of ioprio, weight and ioprio class for the
bfq_queue. BFQ also invokes this function on I/O-request dispatches,
to raise or lower weights more quickly when needed, thereby improving
latency. However, the entity representing the bfq_queue may be on the
active (sub)tree of a service tree when this happens, and, although
with a very low probability, the bfq_queue may happen to also have a
pending change of its ioprio class. If both conditions hold when
__bfq_entity_update_weight_prio() is invoked, then the entity moves to
a sort of hybrid state: the new service tree for the entity, as
returned by bfq_entity_service_tree(), differs from service tree on
which the entity still is. The functions that handle activations and
deactivations of entities do not cope with such a hybrid state (and
would need to become more complex to cope).
This commit addresses this issue by just making
__bfq_entity_update_weight_prio() not perform also a possible pending
change of ioprio class, when invoked on an I/O-request dispatch for a
bfq_queue. Such a change is thus postponed to when
__bfq_entity_update_weight_prio() is invoked on deactivation or
re-scheduling of the bfq_queue.
Reported-by: Marco Piazza <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Laurentiu Nicola <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Valente <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Marco Piazza <[email protected]>
---
block/bfq-iosched.c | 14 ++++++++++----
block/bfq-iosched.h | 3 ++-
block/bfq-wf2q.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index ed93da2..9d4919b 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -3471,11 +3471,17 @@ static void bfq_update_wr_data(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
}
}
}
- /* Update weight both if it must be raised and if it must be lowered */
+ /*
+ * To improve latency (for this or other queues), immediately
+ * update weight both if it must be raised and if it must be
+ * lowered. Since, entity may be on some active tree here, and
+ * might have a pending change of its ioprio class, invoke
+ * next function with the last parameter unset (see the
+ * comments on the function).
+ */
if ((entity->weight > entity->orig_weight) != (bfqq->wr_coeff > 1))
- __bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(
- bfq_entity_service_tree(entity),
- entity);
+ __bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(bfq_entity_service_tree(entity),
+ entity, false);
}
/*
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.h b/block/bfq-iosched.h
index 5c3bf98..8fd83b8 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.h
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.h
@@ -892,7 +892,8 @@ void bfq_put_idle_entity(struct bfq_service_tree *st,
struct bfq_entity *entity);
struct bfq_service_tree *
__bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(struct bfq_service_tree *old_st,
- struct bfq_entity *entity);
+ struct bfq_entity *entity,
+ bool update_class_too);
void bfq_bfqq_served(struct bfq_queue *bfqq, int served);
void bfq_bfqq_charge_time(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq,
unsigned long time_ms);
diff --git a/block/bfq-wf2q.c b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
index 8726ede..5ec05cd 100644
--- a/block/bfq-wf2q.c
+++ b/block/bfq-wf2q.c
@@ -694,10 +694,28 @@ struct bfq_service_tree *bfq_entity_service_tree(struct bfq_entity *entity)
return sched_data->service_tree + idx;
}
-
+/*
+ * Update weight and priority of entity. If update_class_too is true,
+ * then update the ioprio_class of entity too.
+ *
+ * The reason why the update of ioprio_class is controlled through the
+ * last parameter is as follows. Changing the ioprio class of an
+ * entity implies changing the destination service trees for that
+ * entity. If such a change occurred when the entity is already on one
+ * of the service trees for its previous class, then the state of the
+ * entity would become more complex: none of the new possible service
+ * trees for the entity, according to bfq_entity_service_tree(), would
+ * match any of the possible service trees on which the entity
+ * is. Complex operations involving these trees, such as entity
+ * activations and deactivations, should take into account this
+ * additional complexity. To avoid this issue, this function is
+ * invoked with update_class_too unset in the points in the code where
+ * entity may happen to be on some tree.
+ */
struct bfq_service_tree *
__bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(struct bfq_service_tree *old_st,
- struct bfq_entity *entity)
+ struct bfq_entity *entity,
+ bool update_class_too)
{
struct bfq_service_tree *new_st = old_st;
@@ -739,9 +757,15 @@ __bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(struct bfq_service_tree *old_st,
bfq_weight_to_ioprio(entity->orig_weight);
}
- if (bfqq)
+ if (bfqq && update_class_too)
bfqq->ioprio_class = bfqq->new_ioprio_class;
- entity->prio_changed = 0;
+
+ /*
+ * Reset prio_changed only if the ioprio_class change
+ * is not pending any longer.
+ */
+ if (!bfqq || bfqq->ioprio_class == bfqq->new_ioprio_class)
+ entity->prio_changed = 0;
/*
* NOTE: here we may be changing the weight too early,
@@ -867,7 +891,12 @@ static void bfq_update_fin_time_enqueue(struct bfq_entity *entity,
{
struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bfq_entity_to_bfqq(entity);
- st = __bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(st, entity);
+ /*
+ * When this function is invoked, entity is not in any service
+ * tree, then it is safe to invoke next function with the last
+ * parameter set (see the comments on the function).
+ */
+ st = __bfq_entity_update_weight_prio(st, entity, true);
bfq_calc_finish(entity, entity->budget);
/*
--
2.10.0
On 07/03/2017 02:00 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> I'm writing this short cover letter to hopefully help you decide what
> to do with this patch, in this late phase of the development
> cycle. This patch fixes a bug causing kernel crashes for at least
> one year. Crashes apparently affect only a minority of users, but are
> systematic for them (a crash every few tens of minutes for some).
By the time you wrote that email, 4.12 was already released for hours.
So there's really no choice this time but to queue it up for 4.13.
--
Jens Axboe
> Il giorno 04 lug 2017, alle ore 00:49, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> ha scritto:
>
> On 07/03/2017 02:00 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>> I'm writing this short cover letter to hopefully help you decide what
>> to do with this patch, in this late phase of the development
>> cycle. This patch fixes a bug causing kernel crashes for at least
>> one year. Crashes apparently affect only a minority of users, but are
>> systematic for them (a crash every few tens of minutes for some).
>
> By the time you wrote that email, 4.12 was already released for hours.
Oops ...
> So there's really no choice this time but to queue it up for 4.13.
>
At least, no decision to make :)
Thanks,
Paolo
> --
> Jens Axboe
>