Hi.
30.01.2018 09:19, Ming Lei wrote:
Hi,
We knew there is IO hang issue on BFQ over USB-storage wrt. blk-mq, and
last time I found it is inside BFQ. You can try the debug patch in the
following link[1] to see if it is same with the previous report[1][2]:
[1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=151214241518562&w=2
[2] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198023
If you aren't sure if they are same, please post the trace somewhere,
then I can check if it is a new bug.
OK, first, I got 2 more stacktraces without tracing, then I've rebooted
with your patch and checked tracing.
Before reboot, cfdisk:
===
[ 266.630386] INFO: task cfdisk:437 blocked for more than 20 seconds.
[ 266.640950] Not tainted 4.15.0-pf1 #1
[ 266.645131] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs"
disables this message.
[ 266.651789] cfdisk D 0 437 410 0x00000000
[ 266.661331] Call Trace:
[ 266.664517] ? __schedule+0x35f/0x1000
[ 266.668660] ? bio_alloc_bioset+0xc7/0x1e0
[ 266.672330] ? submit_bh_wbc+0x162/0x190
[ 266.678034] schedule+0x32/0xc0
[ 266.681293] io_schedule+0x12/0x40
[ 266.685230] wait_on_page_bit+0xea/0x130
[ 266.689015] ? add_to_page_cache_lru+0xe0/0xe0
[ 266.693456] ? blkdev_writepages+0x30/0x30
[ 266.695521] do_read_cache_page+0x167/0x350
[ 266.697160] read_dev_sector+0x28/0xc0
[ 266.698685] scsi_bios_ptable+0x4e/0x120 [scsi_mod]
[ 266.700156] scsicam_bios_param+0x16/0x1a0 [scsi_mod]
[ 266.701868] sd_getgeo+0xbf/0xd0 [sd_mod]
[ 266.703388] blkdev_ioctl+0x178/0x990
[ 266.704818] block_ioctl+0x39/0x40
[ 266.706381] do_vfs_ioctl+0xa4/0x630
[ 266.708584] ? __fput+0x131/0x1e0
[ 266.710184] ? preempt_count_add+0x68/0xa0
[ 266.711762] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x1d/0x30
[ 266.713304] SyS_ioctl+0x74/0x80
[ 266.714502] ? exit_to_usermode_loop+0x39/0xa0
[ 266.717352] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x20/0x83
[ 266.718857] RIP: 0033:0x7fc482064d87
===
Blocked kworker:
===
[ 389.511083] INFO: task kworker/u8:5:178 blocked for more than 20
seconds.
[ 389.516454] Not tainted 4.15.0-pf1 #1
[ 389.520091] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs"
disables this
message.
[ 389.524726] kworker/u8:5 D 0 178 2 0x80000000
[ 389.528321] Workqueue: events_freezable_power_ disk_events_workfn
[ 389.532228] Call Trace:
[ 389.534909] ? __schedule+0x35f/0x1000
[ 389.541906] ? blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x116/0x190
[ 389.546561] ? __sbitmap_get_word+0x2a/0x80
[ 389.551167] ? sbitmap_get_shallow+0x5c/0xa0
[ 389.555633] schedule+0x32/0xc0
[ 389.559803] io_schedule+0x12/0x40
[ 389.564504] blk_mq_get_tag+0x181/0x2a0
[ 389.572541] ? wait_woken+0x80/0x80
[ 389.576008] blk_mq_get_request+0xf9/0x410
[ 389.579998] blk_mq_alloc_request+0x7e/0xe0
[ 389.584824] blk_get_request_flags+0x40/0x160
[ 389.588917] scsi_execute+0x38/0x1e0 [scsi_mod]
[ 389.593079] scsi_test_unit_ready+0x5d/0xd0 [scsi_mod]
[ 389.596966] sd_check_events+0xf5/0x1a0 [sd_mod]
[ 389.602558] disk_check_events+0x69/0x150
[ 389.604822] process_one_work+0x1df/0x420
[ 389.606584] worker_thread+0x2b/0x3d0
[ 389.608175] ? process_one_work+0x420/0x420
[ 389.609833] kthread+0x113/0x130
[ 389.611327] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x70/0x70
[ 389.612852] ret_from_fork+0x35/0x40
===
After reboot, tracing info:
===
systemd-udevd-269 [000] ...1 4.309198:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: get rq->0, 1
kworker/0:1H-174 [000] .... 4.309380:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: not get rq, 1
kworker/u8:2-167 [000] .... 4.309562: bfq_insert_requests:
insert rq->0
kworker/u8:2-167 [000] ...1 4.309563:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: get rq->0, 1
kworker/0:1H-174 [000] .... 4.309694:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: not get rq, 1
kworker/u8:2-167 [000] .... 4.309879: bfq_insert_requests:
insert rq->0
kworker/u8:2-167 [000] ...1 4.309880:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: get rq->0, 1
kworker/0:1H-174 [000] .... 4.310001:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: not get rq, 1
systemd-udevd-271 [000] .... 4.311033: bfq_insert_requests:
insert rq->0
systemd-udevd-271 [000] ...1 4.311037:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: not get rq, 1
cfdisk-408 [000] .... 13.484220: bfq_insert_requests:
insert rq->1
kworker/0:1H-174 [000] .... 13.484253:
blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched: not get rq, 1
===
Looks the same, right?
Or Paolo should know if the issue is fixed or not in V4.15.
So, Paolo :)?
Regards,
Oleksandr
