On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 04:39:47PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 12:48:58PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:45 AM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > This is V2 of the patch. Posted V1 here. > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20210416173524.GA1379987@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > > Based on feedback from Dan and Jan, modified the patch to wake up > > > all waiters when dax entry is invalidated. This solves the issues > > > of missed wakeups. > > > > Care to send a formal patch with this commentary moved below the --- line? > > > > One style fixup below... > > > > > > > > I am seeing missed wakeups which ultimately lead to a deadlock when I am > > > using virtiofs with DAX enabled and running "make -j". I had to mount > > > virtiofs as rootfs and also reduce to dax window size to 256M to reproduce > > > the problem consistently. > > > > > > So here is the problem. put_unlocked_entry() wakes up waiters only > > > if entry is not null as well as !dax_is_conflict(entry). But if I > > > call multiple instances of invalidate_inode_pages2() in parallel, > > > then I can run into a situation where there are waiters on > > > this index but nobody will wait these. > > > > > > invalidate_inode_pages2() > > > invalidate_inode_pages2_range() > > > invalidate_exceptional_entry2() > > > dax_invalidate_mapping_entry_sync() > > > __dax_invalidate_entry() { > > > xas_lock_irq(&xas); > > > entry = get_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0); > > > ... > > > ... > > > dax_disassociate_entry(entry, mapping, trunc); > > > xas_store(&xas, NULL); > > > ... > > > ... > > > put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry); > > > xas_unlock_irq(&xas); > > > } > > > > > > Say a fault in in progress and it has locked entry at offset say "0x1c". > > > Now say three instances of invalidate_inode_pages2() are in progress > > > (A, B, C) and they all try to invalidate entry at offset "0x1c". Given > > > dax entry is locked, all tree instances A, B, C will wait in wait queue. > > > > > > When dax fault finishes, say A is woken up. It will store NULL entry > > > at index "0x1c" and wake up B. When B comes along it will find "entry=0" > > > at page offset 0x1c and it will call put_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0). And > > > this means put_unlocked_entry() will not wake up next waiter, given > > > the current code. And that means C continues to wait and is not woken > > > up. > > > > > > This patch fixes the issue by waking up all waiters when a dax entry > > > has been invalidated. This seems to fix the deadlock I am facing > > > and I can make forward progress. > > > > > > Reported-by: Sergio Lopez <slp@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > fs/dax.c | 12 ++++++------ > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > Index: redhat-linux/fs/dax.c > > > =================================================================== > > > --- redhat-linux.orig/fs/dax.c 2021-04-16 14:16:44.332140543 -0400 > > > +++ redhat-linux/fs/dax.c 2021-04-19 11:24:11.465213474 -0400 > > > @@ -264,11 +264,11 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct x > > > finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait); > > > } > > > > > > -static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry) > > > +static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry, bool wake_all) > > > { > > > /* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */ > > > if (entry && !dax_is_conflict(entry)) > > > - dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, false); > > > + dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, wake_all); > > > } > > > > > > /* > > > @@ -622,7 +622,7 @@ struct page *dax_layout_busy_page_range( > > > entry = get_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0); > > > if (entry) > > > page = dax_busy_page(entry); > > > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry); > > > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, false); > > > > I'm not a fan of raw true/false arguments because if you read this > > line in isolation you need to go read put_unlocked_entry() to recall > > what that argument means. So lets add something like: > > > > /** > > * enum dax_entry_wake_mode: waitqueue wakeup toggle > > * @WAKE_NEXT: entry was not mutated > > * @WAKE_ALL: entry was invalidated, or resized > > */ > > enum dax_entry_wake_mode { > > WAKE_NEXT, > > WAKE_ALL, > > } > > > > ...and use that as the arg for dax_wake_entry(). So I'd expect this to > > be a 3 patch series, introduce dax_entry_wake_mode for > > dax_wake_entry(), introduce the argument for put_unlocked_entry() > > without changing the logic, and finally this bug fix. Feel free to add > > 'Fixes: ac401cc78242 ("dax: New fault locking")' in case you feel this > > needs to be backported. > > Hi Dan, > > I will make changes as you suggested and post another version. > > I am wondering what to do with dax_wake_entry(). It also has a boolean > parameter wake_all. Should that be converted as well to make use of > enum dax_entry_wake_mode? oops, you already mentioned dax_wake_entry(). I read too fast. Sorry for the noise Vivek
