[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] ocfs2: dlm: fix deadlock due to nested lock
Junxiao Bi
junxiao.bi at oracle.com
Sun Dec 6 22:44:21 PST 2015
Hi Eric,
On 12/04/2015 06:07 PM, Eric Ren wrote:
> Hi Junxiao,
>
> The patch is likely unfair to the blocked lock on remote node(node Y in
> your case). The original code let the second request to go only if it's
> compatible with the predicting level we would downconvert for node Y.
> Considering more extremer situation, there're more acquiring from node
> X, that way node Y could heavily starve, right?
With this fix, lock request is not blocked if ex_holders and ro_holders
not zero. So if new lock request is always coming before old lock is
released, node Y will starve. Could this happen in a real user case?
I think there would be a window where locks are released, at that time,
node Y could get the lock. Indeed ping-pang locking between nodes will
hurt performance, so holding a lock in a node for a short while will be
good to performance.
>
> Just tring to provide some thoughts on this;-)
That's good. Thank you for the review.
>
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 04:50:03PM +0800, Junxiao Bi wrote:
>> DLM allows nested cluster locking. One node X can acquire a cluster lock
>> two times before release it. But between these two acquiring, if another
>> node Y asks for the same lock and is blocked, then a bast will be sent to
>> node X and OCFS2_LOCK_BLOCKED will be set in that lock's lockres. In this
>> case, the second acquiring of that lock in node X will cause a deadlock.
>> Not block for nested locking can fix this.
> Could you please describe the deadlock more specifically?
Process A on node X Process B on node Y
lock_XYZ(EX)
lock_XYZ(EX)
lock_XYZ(EX) >>>> blocked forever
>>
>> Use ocfs2-test multiple reflink test can reproduce this on v4.3 kernel,
>> the whole cluster hung, and get the following call trace.
> Could the deaklock happen on other older kernel? Because I didn't see this
> issue when testing reflink on multiple nodes on older kernel.
We never reproduce this on old kernels. commit 743b5f1434f5 is the key
to reproduce this issue. As it locks one cluster lock twice in one
process before releasing it.
Thanks,
Junxiao.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>>
>> INFO: task multi_reflink_t:10118 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>> Tainted: G OE 4.3.0 #1
>> "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
>> multi_reflink_t D ffff88003e816980 0 10118 10117 0x00000080
>> ffff880005b735f8 0000000000000082 ffffffff81a25500 ffff88003e750000
>> ffff880005b735c8 ffffffff8117992f ffffea0000929f80 ffff88003e816980
>> 7fffffffffffffff 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 ffffea0000929f80
>> Call Trace:
>> [<ffffffff8117992f>] ? find_get_entry+0x2f/0xc0
>> [<ffffffff816a68fe>] schedule+0x3e/0x80
>> [<ffffffff816a9358>] schedule_timeout+0x1c8/0x220
>> [<ffffffffa067eee4>] ? ocfs2_inode_cache_unlock+0x14/0x20 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffffa06bb1e9>] ? ocfs2_metadata_cache_unlock+0x19/0x30 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffffa06bb399>] ? ocfs2_buffer_cached+0x99/0x170 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffffa067eee4>] ? ocfs2_inode_cache_unlock+0x14/0x20 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffffa06bb1e9>] ? ocfs2_metadata_cache_unlock+0x19/0x30 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffff810c5f41>] ? __raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock+0x11/0x20
>> [<ffffffff816a78ae>] wait_for_completion+0xde/0x110
>> [<ffffffff810a81b0>] ? try_to_wake_up+0x240/0x240
>> [<ffffffffa066f65d>] __ocfs2_cluster_lock+0x20d/0x720 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffff810c5f41>] ? __raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock+0x11/0x20
>> [<ffffffffa0674841>] ocfs2_inode_lock_full_nested+0x181/0x400 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffffa06d0db3>] ? ocfs2_iop_get_acl+0x53/0x113 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffff81210cd2>] ? igrab+0x42/0x70
>> [<ffffffffa06d0db3>] ocfs2_iop_get_acl+0x53/0x113 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffff81254583>] get_acl+0x53/0x70
>> [<ffffffff81254923>] posix_acl_create+0x73/0x130
>> [<ffffffffa068f0bf>] ocfs2_mknod+0x7cf/0x1140 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffffa068fba2>] ocfs2_create+0x62/0x110 [ocfs2]
>> [<ffffffff8120be25>] ? __d_alloc+0x65/0x190
>> [<ffffffff81201b3e>] ? __inode_permission+0x4e/0xd0
>> [<ffffffff81202cf5>] vfs_create+0xd5/0x100
>> [<ffffffff812009ed>] ? lookup_real+0x1d/0x60
>> [<ffffffff81203a03>] lookup_open+0x173/0x1a0
>> [<ffffffff810c59c6>] ? percpu_down_read+0x16/0x70
>> [<ffffffff81205fea>] do_last+0x31a/0x830
>> [<ffffffff81201b3e>] ? __inode_permission+0x4e/0xd0
>> [<ffffffff81201bd8>] ? inode_permission+0x18/0x50
>> [<ffffffff812046b0>] ? link_path_walk+0x290/0x550
>> [<ffffffff8120657c>] path_openat+0x7c/0x140
>> [<ffffffff812066c5>] do_filp_open+0x85/0xe0
>> [<ffffffff8120190f>] ? getname_flags+0x7f/0x1f0
>> [<ffffffff811f613a>] do_sys_open+0x11a/0x220
>> [<ffffffff8100374b>] ? syscall_trace_enter_phase1+0x15b/0x170
>> [<ffffffff811f627e>] SyS_open+0x1e/0x20
>> [<ffffffff816aa2ae>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x12/0x71
>>
>> commit 743b5f1434f5 ("ocfs2: take inode lock in ocfs2_iop_set/get_acl()")
>> add a nested locking to ocfs2_mknod() which exports this deadlock, but
>> indeed this is a common issue, it can be triggered in other place.
>>
>> Cc: <stable at vger.kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi at oracle.com>
>> ---
>> fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
>> index 1c91103..5b7d9d4 100644
>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
>> @@ -1295,7 +1295,9 @@ static inline int ocfs2_may_continue_on_blocked_lock(struct ocfs2_lock_res *lock
>> {
>> BUG_ON(!(lockres->l_flags & OCFS2_LOCK_BLOCKED));
>>
>> - return wanted <= ocfs2_highest_compat_lock_level(lockres->l_blocking);
>> + /* allow nested lock request go to avoid deadlock. */
>> + return wanted <= ocfs2_highest_compat_lock_level(lockres->l_blocking)
>> + || lockres->l_ro_holders || lockres->l_ex_holders;
>> }
>>
>> static void ocfs2_init_mask_waiter(struct ocfs2_mask_waiter *mw)
>> --
>> 1.7.9.5
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
>> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com
>> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>>
More information about the Ocfs2-devel
mailing list