On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:03:36PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> If a localhost mount is present, then it is easy to deadlock NFS by
> nfsd entering direct reclaim and calling nfs_release_page() which
> requires nfsd to perform an fsync() (which it cannot do because it is
> reclaiming memory).
>
> By setting PF_FSTRANS we stop the memory allocator from ever
> attempting any FS operation would could deadlock.
>
> We need this flag set for any thread which is handling a request from
> the local host, but we also need to always have it for at least 1 or 2
> threads so that we don't end up with all threads blocked in allocation.
>
> When we set PF_FSTRANS we also tell lockdep that we are handling
> reclaim so that it can detect deadlocks for us.
>
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <ne...@suse.de>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 1 +
> net/sunrpc/svc.c | 6 ++++++
> 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> index 9a4a5f9e7468..6af8bc2daf7d 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> @@ -565,6 +565,8 @@ nfsd(void *vrqstp)
> struct svc_xprt *perm_sock =
> list_entry(rqstp->rq_server->sv_permsocks.next, typeof(struct svc_xprt),
> xpt_list);
> struct net *net = perm_sock->xpt_net;
> int err;
> + unsigned int pflags = 0;
> + gfp_t reclaim_state = 0;
>
> /* Lock module and set up kernel thread */
> mutex_lock(&nfsd_mutex);
> @@ -611,14 +613,30 @@ nfsd(void *vrqstp)
> ;
> if (err == -EINTR)
> break;
> + if (rqstp->rq_local && !current_test_flags(PF_FSTRANS)) {
> + current_set_flags_nested(&pflags, PF_FSTRANS);
> + atomic_inc(&rqstp->rq_pool->sp_nr_fstrans);
> + reclaim_state =
> lockdep_set_current_reclaim_state(GFP_KERNEL);
> + }
> validate_process_creds();
> svc_process(rqstp);
> validate_process_creds();
> + if (current_test_flags(PF_FSTRANS) &&
> + atomic_dec_if_positive(&rqstp->rq_pool->sp_nr_fstrans) >=
> 0) {
Yuck, that function has horrible semantics :/ Not your fault though.
> + current_restore_flags_nested(&pflags, PF_FSTRANS);
> + lockdep_restore_current_reclaim_state(reclaim_state);
> + }
Not really knowing much about NFS anymore (all I did know seems to have
bitrotten) the above looks ok I suppose. Refcounting that task state in
something !task_struct feels weird though.
> }
>
> /* Clear signals before calling svc_exit_thread() */
> flush_signals(current);
>
> + if (current_test_flags(PF_FSTRANS)) {
> + current_restore_flags_nested(&pflags, PF_FSTRANS);
> + lockdep_restore_current_reclaim_state(reclaim_state);
> + atomic_dec(&rqstp->rq_pool->sp_nr_fstrans);
> + }
> +
> mutex_lock(&nfsd_mutex);
> nfsdstats.th_cnt --;
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h b/include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h
> index a0dbbd1e00e9..4b274aba51dd 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h
> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ struct svc_pool {
> struct list_head sp_threads; /* idle server threads */
> struct list_head sp_sockets; /* pending sockets */
> unsigned int sp_nrthreads; /* # of threads in pool */
> + atomic_t sp_nr_fstrans; /* # threads with PF_FSTRANS */
> struct list_head sp_all_threads; /* all server threads */
> struct svc_pool_stats sp_stats; /* statistics on pool operation
> */
> int sp_task_pending;/* has pending task */
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc.c b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> index 5de6801cd924..8b13f35b6cbb 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svc.c
> @@ -477,6 +477,12 @@ __svc_create(struct svc_program *prog, unsigned int
> bufsize, int npools,
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pool->sp_threads);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pool->sp_sockets);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pool->sp_all_threads);
> + /* The number of threads with PF_FSTRANS set
> + * should never be reduced below 2, except when
> + * threads exit. So we use atomic_dec_if_positive()
> + * on this value.
> + */
> + atomic_set(&pool->sp_nr_fstrans, -2);
Its not my code, but that's not the recommended multi-line comment
style.
> spin_lock_init(&pool->sp_lock);
> }
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
