mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chuck Lever" <chucklever@gmail.com>
To: "Chris Caputo" <ccaputo@alt.net>
Cc: "Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>,
	nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [NFS] [PATCH 2.6.19-rc6] sunrpc: fix race condition
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:53:12 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <76bd70e30611271153hca57293ie1efdfd1bb446953@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611271900120.10489@nacho.alt.net>

On 11/27/06, Chris Caputo <ccaputo@alt.net> wrote:
> From: Chris Caputo <ccaputo@alt.net>
> [PATCH 2.6.19-rc6] sunrpc: fix race condition
>
> Patch linux-2.6.10-01-rpc_workqueue.dif introduced a race condition into
> net/sunrpc/sched.c in kernels 2.6.11-rc1 through 2.6.19-rc6.  The race
> scenario is as follows...
>
> Given: RPC_TASK_QUEUED, RPC_TASK_RUNNING and RPC_TASK_ASYNC are set.
>
> __rpc_execute() (no spinlock)    rpc_make_runnable() (queue spinlock held)
> -----------------------------    -----------------------------------------
>                                  do_ret = rpc_test_and_set_running(task);
> rpc_clear_running(task);
> if (RPC_IS_ASYNC(task)) {
>         if (RPC_IS_QUEUED(task))
>                 return 0;
>                                  rpc_clear_queued(task);
>                                  if (do_ret)
>                                          return;
>
> Thus both threads return and the task is abandoned forever.
>
> In my test NFS client usage (~200 Mb/s at ~3,000 RPC calls/s) this race
> condition has resulted in processes getting permanently stuck in 'D' state
> often in less than 15 minutes of uptime.
>
> The following patch fixes the problem by returning to use of a spinlock in
> __rpc_execute().
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Caputo <ccaputo@alt.net>
> ---
>
> diff -up a/net/sunrpc/sched.c b/net/sunrpc/sched.c
> --- a/net/sunrpc/sched.c        2006-11-27 08:41:07.000000000 +0000
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/sched.c        2006-11-27 11:14:21.000000000 +0000
> @@ -587,6 +587,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(rpc_exit_task);
>  static int __rpc_execute(struct rpc_task *task)
>  {
>         int             status = 0;
> +       struct rpc_wait_queue *queue;
>
>         dprintk("RPC: %4d rpc_execute flgs %x\n",
>                                 task->tk_pid, task->tk_flags);
> @@ -631,22 +632,27 @@ static int __rpc_execute(struct rpc_task
>                         lock_kernel();
>                         task->tk_action(task);
>                         unlock_kernel();
> +                       /* micro-optimization to avoid spinlock */
> +                       if (!RPC_IS_QUEUED(task))
> +                               continue;
>                 }
>
>                 /*
> -                * Lockless check for whether task is sleeping or not.
> +                * Check whether task is sleeping.
>                  */
> -               if (!RPC_IS_QUEUED(task))
> -                       continue;
> -               rpc_clear_running(task);
> +               queue = task->u.tk_wait.rpc_waitq;
> +               spin_lock_bh(&queue->lock);
>                 if (RPC_IS_ASYNC(task)) {
> -                       /* Careful! we may have raced... */
> -                       if (RPC_IS_QUEUED(task))
> -                               return 0;
> -                       if (rpc_test_and_set_running(task))
> +                       if (RPC_IS_QUEUED(task)) {
> +                               rpc_clear_running(task);
> +                               spin_unlock_bh(&queue->lock);
>                                 return 0;
> +                       }
> +                       spin_unlock_bh(&queue->lock);
>                         continue;
>                 }
> +               rpc_clear_running(task);
> +               spin_unlock_bh(&queue->lock);
>
>                 /* sync task: sleep here */
>                 dprintk("RPC: %4d sync task going to sleep\n", task->tk_pid);

The reason the spin lock was removed from the scheduler is because
once the BKL is removed from the RPC and NFS clients, the locks in the
RPC scheduler become contented.  Each RPC request passes through this
part of the scheduler an average of 12 times (probably more if a bind
or credential refresh is required), so the locking overhead becomes
critical.

As you are working this fix, can you make sure to test with a heavy
RPC workload against a fast server and make sure that lock contention
remains reasonable?

-- 
"We who cut mere stones must always be envisioning cathedrals"
   -- Quarry worker's creed

  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-27 19:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-27 19:04 Chris Caputo
2006-11-27 19:53 ` Chuck Lever [this message]
2006-11-27 20:54 ` Chris Caputo

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=76bd70e30611271153hca57293ie1efdfd1bb446953@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=chucklever@gmail.com \
    --cc=ccaputo@alt.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nfs@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®