On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 12:52 PM Trond Myklebust <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-09-09 at 16:47 +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > This looks like it might be the root cause issue. It looks like
> > you're using pNFS:
> >
> > /proc/3278822/stack:
> > [<0>] pnfs_update_layout+0x603/0xed0 [nfsv4]
> > [<0>] fl_pnfs_update_layout.constprop.18+0x23/0x1e0
> > [nfs_layout_nfsv41_files]
> > [<0>] filelayout_pg_init_write+0x3a/0x70 [nfs_layout_nfsv41_files]
> > [<0>] __nfs_pageio_add_request+0x294/0x470 [nfs]
> > [<0>] nfs_pageio_add_request_mirror+0x2f/0x40 [nfs]
> > [<0>] nfs_pageio_add_request+0x200/0x2d0 [nfs]
> > [<0>] nfs_page_async_flush+0x120/0x310 [nfs]
> > [<0>] nfs_writepages_callback+0x5b/0xc0 [nfs]
> > [<0>] write_cache_pages+0x187/0x4d0
> > [<0>] nfs_writepages+0xe1/0x200 [nfs]
> > [<0>] do_writepages+0xd2/0x1b0
> > [<0>] __writeback_single_inode+0x41/0x360
> > [<0>] writeback_sb_inodes+0x1f0/0x460
> > [<0>] __writeback_inodes_wb+0x5f/0xd0
> > [<0>] wb_writeback+0x235/0x2d0
> > [<0>] wb_workfn+0x312/0x4a0
> > [<0>] process_one_work+0x1c5/0x390
> > [<0>] worker_thread+0x30/0x360
> > [<0>] kthread+0xd7/0x100
> > [<0>] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> >
> > What is the pNFS server you are running against? I see you're using
> > the files pNFS layout type, so is this a NetApp?
This reminds me of the problem that was supposed to be fixed by the
patches that went into 5.19-rc3?.
pNFS: Don't keep retrying if the server replied NFS4ERR_LAYOUTUNAVAILABLE
pNFS: Avoid a live lock condition in pnfs_update_layout()
Igor,
Is the server constantly returning LAYOUT_UNAVAILABLE? And does this
happen to be co-located with a volume move operation?
> >
>
> Sorry for the HTML spam... Resending with all that crap stripped out.
>
> > From: Igor Raits <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 11:09
> > To: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: anna@xxxxxxxxxx <anna@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > <linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: Regression: deadlock in io_schedule /
> > nfs_writepage_locked
> >
> > Hello Trond,
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 5:01 PM Trond Myklebust
> > <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2022-08-22 at 16:43 +0200, Igor Raits wrote:
> > > > [You don't often get email from igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx. Learn why this
> > > > is
> > > > important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> > > >
> > > > Hello Trond,
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 4:02 PM Trond Myklebust
> > > > <trondmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 2022-08-22 at 10:16 +0200, Igor Raits wrote:
> > > > > > [You don't often get email from igor@xxxxxxxxxxxx. Learn why
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hopefully I'm sending this to the right place…
> > > > > > We recently started to see the following stacktrace quite
> > > > > > often
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > VMs that are using NFS extensively (I think after upgrading
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > 5.18.11+, but not sure when exactly. For sure it happens on
> > > > > > 5.18.15):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > INFO: task kworker/u36:10:377691 blocked for more than 122
> > > > > > seconds.
> > > > > > Tainted: G E 5.18.15-1.gdc.el8.x86_64 #1
> > > > > > "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > message.
> > > > > > task:kworker/u36:10 state:D stack: 0 pid:377691 ppid:
> > > > > > 2
> > > > > > flags:0x00004000
> > > > > > Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-0:308)
> > > > > > Call Trace:
> > > > > > <TASK>
> > > > > > __schedule+0x38c/0x7d0
> > > > > > schedule+0x41/0xb0
> > > > > > io_schedule+0x12/0x40
> > > > > > __folio_lock+0x110/0x260
> > > > > > ? filemap_alloc_folio+0x90/0x90
> > > > > > write_cache_pages+0x1e3/0x4d0
> > > > > > ? nfs_writepage_locked+0x1d0/0x1d0 [nfs]
> > > > > > nfs_writepages+0xe1/0x200 [nfs]
> > > > > > do_writepages+0xd2/0x1b0
> > > > > > ? check_preempt_curr+0x47/0x70
> > > > > > ? ttwu_do_wakeup+0x17/0x180
> > > > > > __writeback_single_inode+0x41/0x360
> > > > > > writeback_sb_inodes+0x1f0/0x460
> > > > > > __writeback_inodes_wb+0x5f/0xd0
> > > > > > wb_writeback+0x235/0x2d0
> > > > > > wb_workfn+0x348/0x4a0
> > > > > > ? put_prev_task_fair+0x1b/0x30
> > > > > > ? pick_next_task+0x84/0x940
> > > > > > ? __update_idle_core+0x1b/0xb0
> > > > > > process_one_work+0x1c5/0x390
> > > > > > worker_thread+0x30/0x360
> > > > > > ? process_one_work+0x390/0x390
> > > > > > kthread+0xd7/0x100
> > > > > > ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
> > > > > > ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> > > > > > </TASK>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see that something very similar was fixed in btrfs
> > > > > > (
> > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commi
> > > > > > t/?h=linux-
> > > > > > 5.18.y&id=9535ec371d741fa037e37eddc0a5b25ba82d0027)
> > > > > > but I could not find anything similar for NFS.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you happen to know if this is already fixed? If so, would
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > mind
> > > > > > sharing some commits? If not, could you help getting this
> > > > > > addressed?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The stack trace you show above isn't particularly helpful for
> > > > > diagnosing what the problem is.
> > > > >
> > > > > All it is saying is that 'thread A' is waiting to take a page
> > > > > lock
> > > > > that
> > > > > is being held by a different 'thread B'. Without information on
> > > > > what
> > > > > 'thread B' is doing, and why it isn't releasing the lock, there
> > > > > is
> > > > > nothing we can conclude.
> > > >
> > > > Do you have some hint how to debug this issue further (when it
> > > > happens
> > > > again)? Would `virsh dump` to get a memory dump and then some
> > > > kind of
> > > > "bt all" via crash help to get more information?
> > > > Or something else?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance!
> > > > --
> > > > Igor Raits
> > >
> > > Please try running the following two lines of 'bash' script as
> > > root:
> > >
> > > (for tt in $(grep -l 'nfs[^d]' /proc/*/stack); do echo "${tt}:";
> > > cat ${tt}; echo; done) >/tmp/nfs_threads.txt
> > >
> > > cat /sys/kernel/debug/sunrpc/rpc_clnt/*/tasks > /tmp/rpc_tasks.txt
> > >
> > > and then send us the output from the two files /tmp/nfs_threads.txt
> > > and
> > > /tmp/rpc_tasks.txt.
> > >
> > > The file nfs_threads.txt gives us a full set of stack traces from
> > > all
> > > processes that are currently in the NFS client code. So it should
> > > contain both the stack trace from your 'thread A' above, and the
> > > traces
> > > from all candidates for the 'thread B' process that is causing the
> > > blockage.
> > > The file rpc_tasks.txt gives us the status of any RPC calls that
> > > might
> > > be outstanding and might help diagnose any issues with the TCP
> > > connection.
> > >
> > > That should therefore give us a better starting point for root
> > > causing
> > > the problem.
> >
> > The rpc_tasks is empty but I got nfs_threads from the moment it is
> > stuck (see attached file).
> >
> > It still happens with 5.19.3, 5.19.6.
>
> --
> Trond Myklebust
> Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
> trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
