From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] SCSI: Fix hard lockup in scsi_remove_target()
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:30:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1444833036.2220.38.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1444829611.git.jthumshirn@suse.de>
On Wed, 2015-10-14 at 15:50 +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> Removing a SCSI target via scsi_remove_target() suspected to be racy. When a
> sibling get's removed from the list it can occassionly happen that one CPU is
> stuck endlessly looping around this code block
>
> list_for_each_entry(starget, &shost->__targets, siblings) {
> if (starget->state == STARGET_DEL)
> continue;
How long is the __targets list? It seems a bit unlikely that this is
the exact cause, because for a short list all in STARGET_DEL that loop
should exit very quickly. Where in the code does scsi_remove_target
+0x68/0x240 actually point to?
Is it not a bit more likely that we're following a removed list element?
Since that points back to itself, the list_for_each_entry() would then
circulate forever. If that's the case the simple fix would be to use
the safe version of the list traversal macro.
James
> Resulting in the following hard lockup.
>
> Kernel panic - not syncing: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 0
> [...]
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff8100471d>] dump_trace+0x7d/0x2d0
> [<ffffffff81004a04>] show_stack_log_lvl+0x94/0x170
> [<ffffffff81005cc1>] show_stack+0x21/0x50
> [<ffffffff8151aa75>] dump_stack+0x41/0x51
> [<ffffffff8151545a>] panic+0xc8/0x1d7
> [<ffffffff810fbdda>] watchdog_overflow_callback+0xba/0xc0
> [<ffffffff811336c8>] __perf_event_overflow+0x88/0x240
> [<ffffffff8101e3aa>] intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x1fa/0x3e0
> [<ffffffff81522836>] perf_event_nmi_handler+0x26/0x40
> [<ffffffff81521fcd>] nmi_handle.isra.2+0x8d/0x180
> [<ffffffff815221e6>] do_nmi+0x126/0x3c0
> [<ffffffff8152159b>] end_repeat_nmi+0x1a/0x1e
> [<ffffffffa00212e8>] scsi_remove_target+0x68/0x240 [scsi_mod]
> [<ffffffff81072742>] process_one_work+0x172/0x420
> [<ffffffff810733ba>] worker_thread+0x11a/0x3c0
> [<ffffffff81079d34>] kthread+0xb4/0xc0
> [<ffffffff81528cd8>] ret_from_fork+0x58/0x90
>
> This series attacks the issue by 1) decoupling the __targets and __devices
> lists of struct Scsi_Host from the host_lock spinlock by introducing spinlocks
> for each list and 2) de-coupling the list traversals needed for detecting
> targets/devices to be removed from the actual removal by moving list entries to
> be deleted to a second list and perform the deletion there.
>
>
> The whole series survived a nearly 48h test loop of:
> while [ $not_done ]; do
> umount $mountpoint;
> rmmod $module;
> modprobe $module;
> mount $mountpoint;
> done
>
> This is a follow up of the patch proposed here:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=144377409311774&w=2
> incorporating Christoph's comment
>
> Johannes Thumshirn (3):
> SCSI: Introduce device_lock and target_lock in Scsi_Host
> SCSI: Rework list handling in scsi_target_remove
> SCSI: Rework list handling in __scsi_target_remove
>
> drivers/scsi/53c700.c | 3 +++
> drivers/scsi/hosts.c | 2 ++
> drivers/scsi/scsi.c | 8 ++++----
> drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c | 10 +++++-----
> drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> include/scsi/scsi_host.h | 2 ++
> 6 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-14 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-14 13:50 Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 13:50 ` [PATCH 1/3] SCSI: Introduce device_lock and target_lock in Scsi_Host Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 14:14 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-10-14 14:17 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-10-14 14:35 ` kbuild test robot
2015-10-14 13:50 ` [PATCH 2/3] SCSI: Rework list handling in scsi_target_remove Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 14:18 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-10-14 13:50 ` [PATCH 3/3] SCSI: Rework list handling in __scsi_target_remove Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 14:19 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-10-14 14:30 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2015-10-14 14:39 ` [PATCH 0/3] SCSI: Fix hard lockup in scsi_remove_target() Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 15:45 ` James Bottomley
2015-10-14 17:36 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 18:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-16 11:24 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 16:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-14 17:34 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-14 20:22 ` Ewan Milne
2015-10-15 7:07 ` Johannes Thumshirn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1444833036.2220.38.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
--to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome