On Tue, 2023-01-10 at 11:17 -0800, dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 1/10/23 10:34 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-01-10 at 18:17 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > > > On Jan 10, 2023, at 12:33 PM, Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 1/10/23 2:30 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 2023-01-09 at 22:48 -0800, Dai Ngo wrote:
> > > > > > Currently nfsd4_state_shrinker_worker can be schduled multiple times
> > > > > > from nfsd4_state_shrinker_count when memory is low. This causes
> > > > > > the WARN_ON_ONCE in __queue_delayed_work to trigger.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This patch allows only one instance of nfsd4_state_shrinker_worker
> > > > > > at a time using the nfsd_shrinker_active flag, protected by the
> > > > > > client_lock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Replace mod_delayed_work with queue_delayed_work since we
> > > > > > don't expect to modify the delay of any pending work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fixes: 44df6f439a17 ("NFSD: add delegation reaper to react to low memory condition")
> > > > > > Reported-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > fs/nfsd/netns.h | 1 +
> > > > > > fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> > > > > > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/netns.h b/fs/nfsd/netns.h
> > > > > > index 8c854ba3285b..801d70926442 100644
> > > > > > --- a/fs/nfsd/netns.h
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/nfsd/netns.h
> > > > > > @@ -196,6 +196,7 @@ struct nfsd_net {
> > > > > > atomic_t nfsd_courtesy_clients;
> > > > > > struct shrinker nfsd_client_shrinker;
> > > > > > struct delayed_work nfsd_shrinker_work;
> > > > > > + bool nfsd_shrinker_active;
> > > > > > };
> > > > > > /* Simple check to find out if a given net was properly initialized */
> > > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > > > > > index ee56c9466304..e00551af6a11 100644
> > > > > > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > > > > > @@ -4407,11 +4407,20 @@ nfsd4_state_shrinker_count(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> > > > > > struct nfsd_net *nn = container_of(shrink,
> > > > > > struct nfsd_net, nfsd_client_shrinker);
> > > > > > + spin_lock(&nn->client_lock);
> > > > > > + if (nn->nfsd_shrinker_active) {
> > > > > > + spin_unlock(&nn->client_lock);
> > > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > Is this extra machinery really necessary? The bool and spinlock don't
> > > > > seem to be needed. Typically there is no issue with calling
> > > > > queued_delayed_work when the work is already queued. It just returns
> > > > > false in that case without doing anything.
> > > > When there are multiple calls to mod_delayed_work/queue_delayed_work
> > > > we hit the WARN_ON_ONCE's in __queue_delayed_work and __queue_work if
> > > > the work is queued but not execute yet.
> > > The delay argument of zero is interesting. If it's set to a value
> > > greater than zero, do you still see a problem?
> > >
> > It should be safe to call it with a delay of 0. If it's always queued
> > with a delay of 0 though (and it seems to be), you could save a little
> > space by using a struct work_struct instead.
>
> Can I defer this optimization for now? I need some time to look into it.
>
I'd like to see it as part of the eventual patch that's merged. There's
no reason to use a delayed_work struct here at all. You always want the
shrinker work to run ASAP. It should be a simple conversion.
> >
> > Also, I'm not sure if this is related, but where do you cancel the
> > nfsd_shrinker_work before tearing down the struct nfsd_net? I'm not sure
> > that would explains the problem Mike reported, but I think that needs to
> > be addressed.
>
> Yes, good catch. I will add the cancelling in v2 patch.
>
>
Looking over the traces that Mike posted, I suspect this is the real
bug, particularly if the server is being restarted during this test.
> >
> > > > This problem was reported by Mike. I initially tried with only the
> > > > bool but that was not enough that was why the spinlock was added.
> > > > Mike verified that the patch fixed the problem.
> > > >
> > > > -Dai
> > > >
> > > > > > count = atomic_read(&nn->nfsd_courtesy_clients);
> > > > > > if (!count)
> > > > > > count = atomic_long_read(&num_delegations);
> > > > > > - if (count)
> > > > > > - mod_delayed_work(laundry_wq, &nn->nfsd_shrinker_work, 0);
> > > > > > + if (count) {
> > > > > > + nn->nfsd_shrinker_active = true;
> > > > > > + spin_unlock(&nn->client_lock);
> > > > > > + queue_delayed_work(laundry_wq, &nn->nfsd_shrinker_work, 0);
> > > > > > + } else
> > > > > > + spin_unlock(&nn->client_lock);
> > > > > > return (unsigned long)count;
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > @@ -6239,6 +6248,9 @@ nfsd4_state_shrinker_worker(struct work_struct *work)
> > > > > > courtesy_client_reaper(nn);
> > > > > > deleg_reaper(nn);
> > > > > > + spin_lock(&nn->client_lock);
> > > > > > + nn->nfsd_shrinker_active = 0;
> > > > > > + spin_unlock(&nn->client_lock);
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > static inline __be32 nfs4_check_fh(struct svc_fh *fhp, struct nfs4_stid *stp)
> > > --
> > > Chuck Lever
> > >
> > >
> > >
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
