在 2022/4/15 15:35, Bob Pearson 写道:
On 4/15/22 02:32, Yanjun Zhu wrote:在 2022/4/15 15:22, Bob Pearson 写道:On 4/15/22 01:49, Yanjun Zhu wrote:在 2022/4/15 14:35, Bob Pearson 写道:On 4/15/22 00:54, Yanjun Zhu wrote:在 2022/4/15 13:37, Bob Pearson 写道:On 4/15/22 14:56, yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx wrote:From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> This is a dead lock problem. The xa_lock first is acquired in this: {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at: lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0 _raw_spin_lock+0x33/0x80 __rxe_add_to_pool+0x183/0x230 [rdma_rxe] __ib_alloc_pd+0xf9/0x550 [ib_core] ib_mad_init_device+0x2d9/0xd20 [ib_core] add_client_context+0x2fa/0x450 [ib_core] enable_device_and_get+0x1b7/0x350 [ib_core] ib_register_device+0x757/0xaf0 [ib_core] rxe_register_device+0x2eb/0x390 [rdma_rxe] rxe_net_add+0x83/0xc0 [rdma_rxe] rxe_newlink+0x76/0x90 [rdma_rxe] nldev_newlink+0x245/0x3e0 [ib_core] rdma_nl_rcv_msg+0x2d4/0x790 [ib_core] rdma_nl_rcv+0x1ca/0x3f0 [ib_core] netlink_unicast+0x43b/0x640 netlink_sendmsg+0x7eb/0xc40 sock_sendmsg+0xe0/0x110 __sys_sendto+0x1d7/0x2b0 __x64_sys_sendto+0xdd/0x1b0 do_syscall_64+0x37/0x80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xaeThere is a separate xarray for each object pool. So this one is rxe->pd_pool.xa.xa_lock from rxe_alloc_pd().Then xa_lock is acquired in this: {IN-SOFTIRQ-W}: Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x57 mark_lock.part.52.cold.79+0x3c/0x46 __lock_acquire+0x1565/0x34a0 lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0 _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x42/0x90 rxe_pool_get_index+0x72/0x1d0 [rdma_rxe] rxe_get_av+0x168/0x2a0 [rdma_rxe] rxe_requester+0x75b/0x4a90 [rdma_rxe] rxe_do_task+0x134/0x230 [rdma_rxe] tasklet_action_common.isra.12+0x1f7/0x2d0 __do_softirq+0x1ea/0xa4c run_ksoftirqd+0x32/0x60 smpboot_thread_fn+0x503/0x860 kthread+0x29b/0x340 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30And this one is rxe->ah_pool.xa.xa_lock from rxe_requester in the process of sending a UD packet from a work request which contains the index of the ah. For your story to work there needs to be an another ah_pool.xa.xa_lock somewhere. Let's assume it is there somewhere and it's from (a different) add_to_pool call then the add_to_pool_ routine should disable interrupts when it gets the lock with spin_lock_xxx. But only for AH objects. This may be old news.What do you mean? Please check the call trace in the bug.I mean the trace you show here shows an instance of xa_lock being acquired from the pd pool followed by an instance of xa_lock being acquired from rxe_pool_get_index from the ah pool. They are different locks. They can't deadlock against each other. So there must be some other trace (not shown) that also gets xa_lock from the ah pool.Please check the bug report mail. The link is news://nntp.lore.kernel.org:119/CAHj4cs-MT13RiEsWXUAcX_H5jEtjsebuZgSeUcfptNVuELgjYQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx BTW, what is the update about wr crash caused by your xarray patches? Zhu YanjunZhu Yanjun</TASK> From the above, in the function __rxe_add_to_pool, xa_lock is acquired. Then the function __rxe_add_to_pool is interrupted by softirq. The function rxe_pool_get_index will also acquire xa_lock. Finally, the dead lock appears. [ 296.806097] CPU0 [ 296.808550] ---- [ 296.811003] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <----- __rxe_add_to_pool [ 296.814583] <Interrupt> [ 296.817209] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <---- rxe_pool_get_index [ 296.820961] *** DEADLOCK *** Fixes: 3225717f6dfa ("RDMA/rxe: Replace red-black trees by carrays") Reported-and-tested-by: Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> --- V3->V4: xa_lock_irq locks are used. V2->V3: __rxe_add_to_pool is between spin_lock and spin_unlock, so GFP_ATOMIC is used in __rxe_add_to_pool. V1->V2: Replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC --- drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c index 87066d04ed18..f1f06dc7e64f 100644 --- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ void rxe_pool_init(struct rxe_dev *rxe, struct rxe_pool *pool, atomic_set(&pool->num_elem, 0); - xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC); + xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC | XA_FLAGS_LOCK_IRQ); pool->limit.min = info->min_index; pool->limit.max = info->max_index; } @@ -138,8 +138,10 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool) elem->obj = obj; kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt); - err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit, - &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL); + xa_lock_irq(&pool->xa); + err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit, + &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL); + xa_unlock_irq(&pool->xa); if (err) goto err_free; @@ -155,6 +157,7 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool) int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem) { int err; + unsigned long flags; if (WARN_ON(pool->flags & RXE_POOL_ALLOC)) return -EINVAL; @@ -166,8 +169,10 @@ int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem) elem->obj = (u8 *)elem - pool->elem_offset; kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt); - err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit, - &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL); + xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags); + err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit, + &pool->next, GFP_ATOMIC); + xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags); if (err) goto err_cnt; @@ -200,8 +205,11 @@ static void rxe_elem_release(struct kref *kref) { struct rxe_pool_elem *elem = container_of(kref, typeof(*elem), ref_cnt); struct rxe_pool *pool = elem->pool; + unsigned long flags; - xa_erase(&pool->xa, elem->index); + xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags); + __xa_erase(&pool->xa, elem->index); + xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags); if (pool->cleanup) pool->cleanup(elem);Here is my output. Everything passes there are no bugs or unexpected warnings in the kernel trace.If I understand you correctly, you mean that the bug reported by Zhang Yi does not exist? I can reproduce this bug with rping. You can not reproduce this bug. It does not mean that this bug does not exist. And with rping, I also found another wr NULL bug. From the mail, you can also verify this wr NULL bug. Let us foucus on this wr NULL bug. OK? Zhu Yanjunbob@ubuntu-21:~/src/blktests$ sudo ./check -q srp srp/001 (Create and remove LUNs) [passed] runtime 3.402s ... 2.753s srp/002 (File I/O on top of multipath concurrently with logout and login (mq)) [passed]time 34.431s ... runtime 34.431s ... 34.328s srp/003 (File I/O on top of multipath concurrently with logout and login (sq)) [not run] legacy device mapper support is missing srp/004 (File I/O on top of multipath concurrently with logout and login (sq-on-srp/004 (File I/O on top of multipath concurrently with logout and login (sq-on-mq)) [not run] legacy device mapper support is missing srp/005 (Direct I/O with large transfer sizes, cmd_sg_entries=255 and bs=4M) [passed] runtime 14.332s ... 12.919s srp/006 (Direct I/O with large transfer sizes, cmd_sg_entries=255 and bs=8M) [passed] runtime 13.361s ... 12.959s srp/007 (Direct I/O with large transfer sizes, cmd_sg_entries=1 and bs=4M) [passed] runtime 14.293s ... 12.912s srp/008 (Direct I/O with large transfer sizes, cmd_sg_entries=1 and bs=8M) [passed] runtime 13.369s ... 13.165s srp/009 (Buffered I/O with large transfer sizes, cmd_sg_entries=255 and bs=4M) [passed] runtime 13.636s ... 14.201s srp/010 (Buffered I/O with large transfer sizes, cmd_sg_entries=255 and bs=8M) [passed] runtime 13.361s ... 12.909s srp/011 (Block I/O on top of multipath concurrently with logout and login) [passed] runtime 33.706s ... 33.571s srp/012 (dm-mpath on top of multiple I/O schedulers) [passed] runtime 13.592s ... 14.138s srp/013 (Direct I/O using a discontiguous buffer) [passed] runtime 3.230s ... 3.513s srp/014 (Run sg_reset while I/O is ongoing) [passed] runtime 33.070s ... 33.059s srp/015 (File I/O on top of multipath concurrently with logout and login (mq) using the SoftiWARP (siw) dsrp/015 (File I/O on top of multipath concurrently with logout and login (mq) using the SoftiWARP (siw) driver) [passed].148s ...you are using SoftiWARP (siw)?not me. it is just the normal behavior of the srp/015 test case. it has always done that. my rdma-core does support siw.
Fine. Let us find the root cause of wr NULL problem. I revert xarray patches and fell back to original source code. This wr NULL problem does not exist. I am working on it. Hope we can fix this wr NULL problem very soon. Zhu Yanjun
runtime 35.148s ... 34.974s bob@ubuntu-21:~/src/blktests$ Bob
