From: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
"zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ke.wang@unisoc.com, steve.kang@unisoc.com,
baocong.liu@unisoc.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: move xa forward when run across zombie page
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 11:12:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGWkznGkLB2zg8ref51YZWq=bso6wBnTg--MguQORno-yQd3nQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221020020451.GS2703033@dread.disaster.area>
On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 10:04 AM Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 07:49:57AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 09:30:42AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 04:09:17AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 10:52:19AM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 11:55 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 01:34:13PM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 8:12 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 01:30:48PM +0800, zhaoyang.huang wrote:
> > > > > > > > > From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Bellowing RCU stall is reported where kswapd traps in a live lock when shrink
> > > > > > > > > superblock's inode list. The direct reason is zombie page keeps staying on the
> > > > > > > > > xarray's slot and make the check and retry loop permanently. The root cause is unknown yet
> > > > > > > > > and supposed could be an xa update without synchronize_rcu etc. I would like to
> > > > > > > > > suggest skip this page to break the live lock as a workaround.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No, the underlying bug should be fixed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > > Understand. IMHO, find_get_entry actruely works as an open API dealing
> > > > > with different kinds of address_spaces page cache, which requires high
> > > > > robustness to deal with any corner cases. Take the current problem as
> > > > > example, the inode with fault page(refcount=0) could remain on the
> > > > > sb's list without live lock problem.
> > > >
> > > > But it's a corner case that shouldn't happen! What else is going on
> > > > at the time? Can you reproduce this problem easily? If so, how?
> > >
> > > I've been seeing this livelock, too. The reproducer is,
> > > unfortunately, something I can't share - it's a massive program that
> > > triggers a data corruption I'm working on solving.
> > >
> > > Now that I've
> > > mostly fixed the data corruption, long duration test runs end up
> > > livelocking in page cache lookup after several hours.
> > >
> > > The test is effectively writing a 100MB file with multiple threads
> > > doing reverse adjacent racing 1MB unaligned writes. Once the file is
> > > written, it is then mmap()d and read back from the filesystem for
> > > verification.
> > >
> > > THis is then run with tens of processes concurrently, and then under
> > > a massively confined memcg (e.g. 32 processes/files are run in a
> > > memcg with only 200MB of memory allowed). This causes writeback,
> > > readahead and memory reclaim to race with incoming mmap read faults
> > > and writes. The livelock occurs on file verification and it appears
> > > to be an interaction with readahead thrashing.
> > >
> > > On my test rig, the physical read to write ratio is at least 20:1 -
> > > with 32 processes running, the 5s IO rates are:
> > >
> > > Device tps MB_read/s MB_wrtn/s MB_dscd/s MB_read MB_wrtn MB_dscd
> > > dm-0 52187.20 3677.42 1345.92 0.00 18387 6729 0
> > > dm-0 62865.60 5947.29 0.08 0.00 29736 0 0
> > > dm-0 62972.80 5911.20 0.00 0.00 29556 0 0
> > > dm-0 59803.00 5516.72 133.47 0.00 27583 667 0
> > > dm-0 63068.20 5292.34 511.52 0.00 26461 2557 0
> > > dm-0 56775.60 4184.52 1248.38 0.00 20922 6241 0
> > > dm-0 63087.40 5901.26 43.77 0.00 29506 218 0
> > > dm-0 62769.00 5833.97 60.54 0.00 29169 302 0
> > > dm-0 64810.20 5636.13 305.63 0.00 28180 1528 0
> > > dm-0 65222.60 5598.99 349.48 0.00 27994 1747 0
> > > dm-0 62444.00 4887.05 926.67 0.00 24435 4633 0
> > > dm-0 63812.00 5622.68 294.66 0.00 28113 1473 0
> > > dm-0 63482.00 5728.43 195.74 0.00 28642 978 0
> > >
> > > This is reading and writing the same amount of file data at the
> > > application level, but once the data has been written and kicked out
> > > of the page cache it seems to require an awful lot more read IO to
> > > get it back to the application. i.e. this looks like mmap() is
> > > readahead thrashing severely, and eventually it livelocks with this
> > > sort of report:
> > >
> > > [175901.982484] rcu: INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks:
> > > [175901.985095] rcu: Tasks blocked on level-1 rcu_node (CPUs 0-15): P25728
> > > [175901.987996] (detected by 0, t=97399871 jiffies, g=15891025, q=1972622 ncpus=32)
> > > [175901.991698] task:test_write state:R running task stack:12784 pid:25728 ppid: 25696 flags:0x00004002
> > > [175901.995614] Call Trace:
> > > [175901.996090] <TASK>
> > > [175901.996594] ? __schedule+0x301/0xa30
> > > [175901.997411] ? sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0xb/0x90
> > > [175901.998513] ? sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0xb/0x90
> > > [175901.999578] ? asm_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x16/0x20
> > > [175902.000714] ? xas_start+0x53/0xc0
> > > [175902.001484] ? xas_load+0x24/0xa0
> > > [175902.002208] ? xas_load+0x5/0xa0
> > > [175902.002878] ? __filemap_get_folio+0x87/0x340
> > > [175902.003823] ? filemap_fault+0x139/0x8d0
> > > [175902.004693] ? __do_fault+0x31/0x1d0
> > > [175902.005372] ? __handle_mm_fault+0xda9/0x17d0
> > > [175902.006213] ? handle_mm_fault+0xd0/0x2a0
> > > [175902.006998] ? exc_page_fault+0x1d9/0x810
> > > [175902.007789] ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30
> > > [175902.008613] </TASK>
> > >
> > > Given that filemap_fault on XFS is probably trying to map large
> > > folios, I do wonder if this is a result of some kind of race with
> > > teardown of a large folio...
> > >
> >
> > I somewhat recently tracked down a hugepage/swap problem that could
> > manifest as a softlockup in the folio lookup path (due to indefinite
> > folio_try_get_rcu() failure):
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20220906190602.1626037-1-bfoster@redhat.com/
> >
> > It could easily be something different leading to the same side effect,
> > particularly since I believe the issue I saw was introduced in v5.19,
> > but might be worth a test if you have a reliable reproducer.
>
> Tests run and, unfortunately, that patch doesn't prevent/fix the
> problem either.
Could you please help to test the following change which breaks the
livelock by surpassing the zero-refcount page directly without reset
iterate to ROOT.
if (!folio_try_get_rcu(folio)) {
goto retry;
}
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-20 3:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-14 5:30 zhaoyang.huang
2022-10-14 12:11 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-17 5:34 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-17 6:58 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-17 15:55 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-18 2:52 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-18 3:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-18 22:30 ` Dave Chinner
2022-10-19 1:16 ` Dave Chinner
2022-10-19 4:47 ` Dave Chinner
2022-10-19 5:48 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-19 13:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-20 1:27 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-26 19:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-27 1:57 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-19 11:49 ` Brian Foster
2022-10-20 2:04 ` Dave Chinner
2022-10-20 3:12 ` Zhaoyang Huang [this message]
2022-10-19 15:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-19 22:04 ` Dave Chinner
2022-10-19 22:46 ` Dave Chinner
2022-10-19 23:42 ` Dave Chinner
2022-10-20 21:52 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-26 8:38 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-26 14:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-26 16:01 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-28 4:05 ` Dave Chinner
2022-11-01 7:17 ` Dave Chinner
2024-04-11 7:04 ` Zhaoyang Huang
2022-10-21 21:37 Pulavarty, Badari
2022-10-21 22:31 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-10-21 22:40 ` Pulavarty, Badari
2022-10-31 19:25 ` Pulavarty, Badari
2022-10-31 19:39 ` Hugh Dickins
2022-10-31 21:33 ` Pulavarty, Badari
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='CAGWkznGkLB2zg8ref51YZWq=bso6wBnTg--MguQORno-yQd3nQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=huangzhaoyang@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baocong.liu@unisoc.com \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=ke.wang@unisoc.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=steve.kang@unisoc.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com \
/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