Hi Ming, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 9:55 AM > To: Wenbin Zeng <wenbin.zeng@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: axboe@xxxxxxxxx; keith.busch@xxxxxxxxx; hare@xxxxxxxx; osandov@xxxxxx; > sagi@xxxxxxxxxxx; bvanassche@xxxxxxx; linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; wenbinzeng(曾文斌) <wenbinzeng@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: update hctx->cpumask at cpu-hotplug(Internet mail) > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 11:24:07PM +0800, Wenbin Zeng wrote: > > Currently hctx->cpumask is not updated when hot-plugging new cpus, > > as there are many chances kblockd_mod_delayed_work_on() getting > > called with WORK_CPU_UNBOUND, workqueue blk_mq_run_work_fn may run > > There are only two cases in which WORK_CPU_UNBOUND is applied: > > 1) single hw queue > > 2) multiple hw queue, and all CPUs in this hctx become offline > > For 1), all CPUs can be found in hctx->cpumask. > > > on the newly-plugged cpus, consequently __blk_mq_run_hw_queue() > > reporting excessive "run queue from wrong CPU" messages because > > cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) returns false. > > The message means CPU hotplug race is triggered. > > Yeah, there is big problem in blk_mq_hctx_notify_dead() which is called > after one CPU is dead, but still run this hw queue to dispatch request, > and all CPUs in this hctx might become offline. > > We have some discussion before on this issue: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/CACVXFVN729SgFQGUgmu1iN7P6Mv5+puE78STz8hj > 9J5bS828Ng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > There is another scenario, you can reproduce it by hot-plugging cpus to kvm guests via qemu monitor (I believe virsh setvcpus --live can do the same thing), for example: (qemu) cpu-add 1 (qemu) cpu-add 2 (qemu) cpu-add 3 In such scenario, cpu 1, 2 and 3 are not visible at boot, hctx->cpumask doesn't get synced when these cpus are added. > > > > This patch added a cpu-hotplug handler into blk-mq, updating > > hctx->cpumask at cpu-hotplug. > > This way isn't correct, hctx->cpumask should be kept as sync with > queue mapping. Please advise what should I do to deal with the above situation? Thanks a lot. > > Thanks, > Ming
