mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>, Michael Shaver <jmshaver@gmail.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Avoid that __wait_on_bit_lock() hangs
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:39:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c2004d9c-1c57-756b-31ad-d88afd459a2b@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160813163208.GA938@redhat.com>

On 08/13/2016 09:32 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 08/12, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> before I started testing. It took some time
>> before I could reproduce the hang in truncate_inode_pages_range().
>
> all I can say this contradicts with the previous testing results with
> my previous patch or with your change in abort_exclusive_wait().

Hello Oleg,

My opinion is that all this means is that we do not yet have a full 
understanding of what is going on.

BTW, I have improved my page lock owner instrumentation patch such that 
it prints a call stack of the lock owner if lock_page() takes too long. 
The following call stack was reported:

__lock_page / pid 8549 / m 0x2: timeout - continuing to wait for 8549
   [<ffffffff8102b316>] save_stack_trace+0x26/0x50
   [<ffffffff81152bee>] add_to_page_cache_lru+0x7e/0x170
   [<ffffffff8121bfc5>] mpage_readpages+0xc5/0x170
   [<ffffffff81215548>] blkdev_readpages+0x18/0x20
   [<ffffffff81163a68>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x268/0x310
   [<ffffffff811640a8>] force_page_cache_readahead+0xa8/0x100
   [<ffffffff81164139>] page_cache_sync_readahead+0x39/0x40
   [<ffffffff81153967>] generic_file_read_iter+0x707/0x920
   [<ffffffff81215920>] blkdev_read_iter+0x30/0x40
   [<ffffffff811d4b4b>] __vfs_read+0xbb/0x130
   [<ffffffff811d4f31>] vfs_read+0x91/0x130
   [<ffffffff811d62b4>] SyS_read+0x44/0xa0
   [<ffffffff816281e5>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xa8

My understanding of mpage_readpages() is that the page unlock happens 
after readahead I/O completed (see also page_endio()). So this probably 
means that an I/O request submitted because of readahead code did not 
get completed. I will see whether I can find anything that's wrong in 
the block layer.

Bart.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-15 23:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-03 16:35 Bart Van Assche
2016-08-03 18:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-03 18:56   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-03 21:30     ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-03 21:51       ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-04 14:09         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-04 14:31           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-05 17:41           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-08 10:22             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-08 14:38               ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-08 16:20                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-08 18:31                   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-09 17:14                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-09 18:48                       ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-09 23:10                         ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 10:45                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 16:01                           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 16:27                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 19:58                           ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-11 17:36                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-12 16:16                               ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-12 16:27                                 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-12 22:47                                 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-13 16:32                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-15 23:39                                     ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2016-08-16 13:06                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-16 16:54                                         ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-17 17:30                                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-13 17:07                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-09 23:56                   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-08-10 10:57                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-08-10 11:03                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-04  0:05       ` Bart Van Assche

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=c2004d9c-1c57-756b-31ad-d88afd459a2b@sandisk.com \
    --to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jmshaver@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®