Message ID | 20240201092559.910982-10-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | dm-raid/md/raid: fix v6.7 regressions | expand |
Hi Kuai On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 5:30 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > > From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > > 1) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that sync thread is frozen, > it only prevent new sync_thread to start, and it can't stop the > running sync thread; Agree with this > 2) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that writes are stopped, use > it as condition for md_stop_writes() in raid_postsuspend() doesn't > look correct. I don't agree with it. __md_stop_writes stops sync thread, so it needs to check this flag. And It looks like the name __md_stop_writes is not right. Does it really stop write io? mddev_suspend should be the function that stop write request. From my understanding, raid_postsuspend does two jobs. One is stopping sync thread. Two is suspending array. > 3) raid_message can set/clear the flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN at anytime, > and if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared while the array is suspended, > new sync_thread can start unexpected. md_action_store doesn't check this either. If the array is suspended and MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared, before patch01, sync thread can't happen. So it looks like patch01 breaks the logic. Regards Xiao > > Fix above problems by using the new helper to suspend the array during > suspend, also disallow raid_message() to change sync_thread status > during suspend. > > Note that after commit f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread"), the > test shell/lvconvert-raid-reshape.sh start to hang in stop_sync_thread(), > and with previous fixes, the test won't hang there anymore, however, the > test will still fail and complain that ext4 is corrupted. And with this > patch, the test won't hang due to stop_sync_thread() or fail due to ext4 > is corrupted anymore. However, there is still a deadlock related to > dm-raid456 that will be fixed in following patches. > > Reported-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/e5e8afe2-e9a8-49a2-5ab0-958d4065c55e@redhat.com/ > Fixes: 1af2048a3e87 ("dm raid: fix deadlock caused by premature md_stop_writes()") > Fixes: 9dbd1aa3a81c ("dm raid: add reshaping support to the target") > Fixes: f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread") > Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > --- > drivers/md/dm-raid.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > index eb009d6bb03a..5ce3c6020b1b 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > @@ -3240,11 +3240,12 @@ static int raid_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv) > rs->md.ro = 1; > rs->md.in_sync = 1; > > - /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ > - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery); > - > /* Has to be held on running the array */ > mddev_suspend_and_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > + > + /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ > + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > + > r = md_run(&rs->md); > rs->md.in_sync = 0; /* Assume already marked dirty */ > if (r) { > @@ -3722,6 +3723,9 @@ static int raid_message(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv, > if (!mddev->pers || !mddev->pers->sync_request) > return -EINVAL; > > + if (test_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) > + return -EBUSY; > + > if (!strcasecmp(argv[0], "frozen")) > set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > else > @@ -3791,15 +3795,31 @@ static void raid_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits) > blk_limits_io_opt(limits, chunk_size_bytes * mddev_data_stripes(rs)); > } > > +static void raid_presuspend(struct dm_target *ti) > +{ > + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > + > + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); > +} > + > +static void raid_presuspend_undo(struct dm_target *ti) > +{ > + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > + > + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); > +} > + > static void raid_postsuspend(struct dm_target *ti) > { > struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > > if (!test_and_set_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) { > /* Writes have to be stopped before suspending to avoid deadlocks. */ > - if (!test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery)) > - md_stop_writes(&rs->md); > - > + md_stop_writes(&rs->md); > mddev_suspend(&rs->md, false); > } > } > @@ -4012,8 +4032,6 @@ static int raid_preresume(struct dm_target *ti) > } > > /* Check for any resize/reshape on @rs and adjust/initiate */ > - /* Be prepared for mddev_resume() in raid_resume() */ > - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > if (mddev->recovery_cp && mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector) { > set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED, &mddev->recovery); > mddev->resync_min = mddev->recovery_cp; > @@ -4056,9 +4074,9 @@ static void raid_resume(struct dm_target *ti) > rs_set_capacity(rs); > > mddev_lock_nointr(mddev); > - clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > mddev->ro = 0; > mddev->in_sync = 0; > + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(mddev); > mddev_unlock_and_resume(mddev); > } > } > @@ -4074,6 +4092,8 @@ static struct target_type raid_target = { > .message = raid_message, > .iterate_devices = raid_iterate_devices, > .io_hints = raid_io_hints, > + .presuspend = raid_presuspend, > + .presuspend_undo = raid_presuspend_undo, > .postsuspend = raid_postsuspend, > .preresume = raid_preresume, > .resume = raid_resume, > -- > 2.39.2 >
Hi, 在 2024/02/18 12:53, Xiao Ni 写道: > Hi Kuai > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 5:30 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: >> >> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> >> >> 1) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that sync thread is frozen, >> it only prevent new sync_thread to start, and it can't stop the >> running sync thread; > > Agree with this > >> 2) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that writes are stopped, use >> it as condition for md_stop_writes() in raid_postsuspend() doesn't >> look correct. > > I don't agree with it. __md_stop_writes stops sync thread, so it needs > to check this flag. And It looks like the name __md_stop_writes is not > right. Does it really stop write io? mddev_suspend should be the > function that stop write request. From my understanding, > raid_postsuspend does two jobs. One is stopping sync thread. Two is > suspending array. MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is not just used in __md_stop_writes(), so I think it's not correct to to check this. For example, if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is set by raid_message(), then __md_stop_writes() will be skipped. > >> 3) raid_message can set/clear the flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN at anytime, >> and if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared while the array is suspended, >> new sync_thread can start unexpected. > > md_action_store doesn't check this either. If the array is suspended > and MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared, before patch01, sync thread can't > happen. So it looks like patch01 breaks the logic. The difference is that md/raid doen't need to frozen sync_thread while suspending the array for now. And I don't understand at all why sync thread can't happed before patch01. Thanks, Kuai > > Regards > Xiao > > >> >> Fix above problems by using the new helper to suspend the array during >> suspend, also disallow raid_message() to change sync_thread status >> during suspend. >> >> Note that after commit f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread"), the >> test shell/lvconvert-raid-reshape.sh start to hang in stop_sync_thread(), >> and with previous fixes, the test won't hang there anymore, however, the >> test will still fail and complain that ext4 is corrupted. And with this >> patch, the test won't hang due to stop_sync_thread() or fail due to ext4 >> is corrupted anymore. However, there is still a deadlock related to >> dm-raid456 that will be fixed in following patches. >> >> Reported-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> >> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/e5e8afe2-e9a8-49a2-5ab0-958d4065c55e@redhat.com/ >> Fixes: 1af2048a3e87 ("dm raid: fix deadlock caused by premature md_stop_writes()") >> Fixes: 9dbd1aa3a81c ("dm raid: add reshaping support to the target") >> Fixes: f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread") >> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> >> --- >> drivers/md/dm-raid.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- >> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c >> index eb009d6bb03a..5ce3c6020b1b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c >> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c >> @@ -3240,11 +3240,12 @@ static int raid_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv) >> rs->md.ro = 1; >> rs->md.in_sync = 1; >> >> - /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ >> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery); >> - >> /* Has to be held on running the array */ >> mddev_suspend_and_lock_nointr(&rs->md); >> + >> + /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ >> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); >> + >> r = md_run(&rs->md); >> rs->md.in_sync = 0; /* Assume already marked dirty */ >> if (r) { >> @@ -3722,6 +3723,9 @@ static int raid_message(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv, >> if (!mddev->pers || !mddev->pers->sync_request) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> + if (test_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) >> + return -EBUSY; >> + >> if (!strcasecmp(argv[0], "frozen")) >> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); >> else >> @@ -3791,15 +3795,31 @@ static void raid_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits) >> blk_limits_io_opt(limits, chunk_size_bytes * mddev_data_stripes(rs)); >> } >> >> +static void raid_presuspend(struct dm_target *ti) >> +{ >> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; >> + >> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); >> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); >> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); >> +} >> + >> +static void raid_presuspend_undo(struct dm_target *ti) >> +{ >> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; >> + >> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); >> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); >> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); >> +} >> + >> static void raid_postsuspend(struct dm_target *ti) >> { >> struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; >> >> if (!test_and_set_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) { >> /* Writes have to be stopped before suspending to avoid deadlocks. */ >> - if (!test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery)) >> - md_stop_writes(&rs->md); >> - >> + md_stop_writes(&rs->md); >> mddev_suspend(&rs->md, false); >> } >> } >> @@ -4012,8 +4032,6 @@ static int raid_preresume(struct dm_target *ti) >> } >> >> /* Check for any resize/reshape on @rs and adjust/initiate */ >> - /* Be prepared for mddev_resume() in raid_resume() */ >> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); >> if (mddev->recovery_cp && mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector) { >> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED, &mddev->recovery); >> mddev->resync_min = mddev->recovery_cp; >> @@ -4056,9 +4074,9 @@ static void raid_resume(struct dm_target *ti) >> rs_set_capacity(rs); >> >> mddev_lock_nointr(mddev); >> - clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); >> mddev->ro = 0; >> mddev->in_sync = 0; >> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(mddev); >> mddev_unlock_and_resume(mddev); >> } >> } >> @@ -4074,6 +4092,8 @@ static struct target_type raid_target = { >> .message = raid_message, >> .iterate_devices = raid_iterate_devices, >> .io_hints = raid_io_hints, >> + .presuspend = raid_presuspend, >> + .presuspend_undo = raid_presuspend_undo, >> .postsuspend = raid_postsuspend, >> .preresume = raid_preresume, >> .resume = raid_resume, >> -- >> 2.39.2 >> > > . >
On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 2:34 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > 在 2024/02/18 12:53, Xiao Ni 写道: > > Hi Kuai > > > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 5:30 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > >> > >> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > >> > >> 1) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that sync thread is frozen, > >> it only prevent new sync_thread to start, and it can't stop the > >> running sync thread; > > > > Agree with this > > > >> 2) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that writes are stopped, use > >> it as condition for md_stop_writes() in raid_postsuspend() doesn't > >> look correct. > > > > I don't agree with it. __md_stop_writes stops sync thread, so it needs > > to check this flag. And It looks like the name __md_stop_writes is not > > right. Does it really stop write io? mddev_suspend should be the > > function that stop write request. From my understanding, > > raid_postsuspend does two jobs. One is stopping sync thread. Two is > > suspending array. > > MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is not just used in __md_stop_writes(), so I think > it's not correct to to check this. For example, if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is > set by raid_message(), then __md_stop_writes() will be skipped. Hi Kuai raid_message sets MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN and it stops the sync thread synchronously. So it doesn't need __md_stop_writes. So from md and dmraid, it has a rule. If you set MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, you're in the process of stopping sync thread. > > > > >> 3) raid_message can set/clear the flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN at anytime, > >> and if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared while the array is suspended, > >> new sync_thread can start unexpected. > > > > md_action_store doesn't check this either. If the array is suspended > > and MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared, before patch01, sync thread can't > > happen. So it looks like patch01 breaks the logic. > > The difference is that md/raid doen't need to frozen sync_thread while > suspending the array for now. And I don't understand at all why sync > thread can't happed before patch01. There is a condition you mentioned above -- the array is suspended. Before patch01, if one array is suspended, the sync thread can't happen. Even raid_messages clears MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, the sync thread can't start. After resume the array, the sync thread can start again. Regards Xiao > > Thanks, > Kuai > > > > > Regards > > Xiao > > > > > >> > >> Fix above problems by using the new helper to suspend the array during > >> suspend, also disallow raid_message() to change sync_thread status > >> during suspend. > >> > >> Note that after commit f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread"), the > >> test shell/lvconvert-raid-reshape.sh start to hang in stop_sync_thread(), > >> and with previous fixes, the test won't hang there anymore, however, the > >> test will still fail and complain that ext4 is corrupted. And with this > >> patch, the test won't hang due to stop_sync_thread() or fail due to ext4 > >> is corrupted anymore. However, there is still a deadlock related to > >> dm-raid456 that will be fixed in following patches. > >> > >> Reported-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> > >> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/e5e8afe2-e9a8-49a2-5ab0-958d4065c55e@redhat.com/ > >> Fixes: 1af2048a3e87 ("dm raid: fix deadlock caused by premature md_stop_writes()") > >> Fixes: 9dbd1aa3a81c ("dm raid: add reshaping support to the target") > >> Fixes: f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread") > >> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/md/dm-raid.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > >> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > >> index eb009d6bb03a..5ce3c6020b1b 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > >> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > >> @@ -3240,11 +3240,12 @@ static int raid_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv) > >> rs->md.ro = 1; > >> rs->md.in_sync = 1; > >> > >> - /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ > >> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery); > >> - > >> /* Has to be held on running the array */ > >> mddev_suspend_and_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > >> + > >> + /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ > >> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > >> + > >> r = md_run(&rs->md); > >> rs->md.in_sync = 0; /* Assume already marked dirty */ > >> if (r) { > >> @@ -3722,6 +3723,9 @@ static int raid_message(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv, > >> if (!mddev->pers || !mddev->pers->sync_request) > >> return -EINVAL; > >> > >> + if (test_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) > >> + return -EBUSY; > >> + > >> if (!strcasecmp(argv[0], "frozen")) > >> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > >> else > >> @@ -3791,15 +3795,31 @@ static void raid_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits) > >> blk_limits_io_opt(limits, chunk_size_bytes * mddev_data_stripes(rs)); > >> } > >> > >> +static void raid_presuspend(struct dm_target *ti) > >> +{ > >> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > >> + > >> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > >> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > >> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); > >> +} > >> + > >> +static void raid_presuspend_undo(struct dm_target *ti) > >> +{ > >> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > >> + > >> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > >> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > >> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); > >> +} > >> + > >> static void raid_postsuspend(struct dm_target *ti) > >> { > >> struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > >> > >> if (!test_and_set_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) { > >> /* Writes have to be stopped before suspending to avoid deadlocks. */ > >> - if (!test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery)) > >> - md_stop_writes(&rs->md); > >> - > >> + md_stop_writes(&rs->md); > >> mddev_suspend(&rs->md, false); > >> } > >> } > >> @@ -4012,8 +4032,6 @@ static int raid_preresume(struct dm_target *ti) > >> } > >> > >> /* Check for any resize/reshape on @rs and adjust/initiate */ > >> - /* Be prepared for mddev_resume() in raid_resume() */ > >> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > >> if (mddev->recovery_cp && mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector) { > >> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED, &mddev->recovery); > >> mddev->resync_min = mddev->recovery_cp; > >> @@ -4056,9 +4074,9 @@ static void raid_resume(struct dm_target *ti) > >> rs_set_capacity(rs); > >> > >> mddev_lock_nointr(mddev); > >> - clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > >> mddev->ro = 0; > >> mddev->in_sync = 0; > >> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(mddev); > >> mddev_unlock_and_resume(mddev); > >> } > >> } > >> @@ -4074,6 +4092,8 @@ static struct target_type raid_target = { > >> .message = raid_message, > >> .iterate_devices = raid_iterate_devices, > >> .io_hints = raid_io_hints, > >> + .presuspend = raid_presuspend, > >> + .presuspend_undo = raid_presuspend_undo, > >> .postsuspend = raid_postsuspend, > >> .preresume = raid_preresume, > >> .resume = raid_resume, > >> -- > >> 2.39.2 > >> > > > > . > > >
Hi, 在 2024/02/19 15:27, Xiao Ni 写道: > On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 2:34 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> 在 2024/02/18 12:53, Xiao Ni 写道: >>> Hi Kuai >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 5:30 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> >>>> >>>> 1) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that sync thread is frozen, >>>> it only prevent new sync_thread to start, and it can't stop the >>>> running sync thread; >>> >>> Agree with this >>> >>>> 2) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that writes are stopped, use >>>> it as condition for md_stop_writes() in raid_postsuspend() doesn't >>>> look correct. >>> >>> I don't agree with it. __md_stop_writes stops sync thread, so it needs >>> to check this flag. And It looks like the name __md_stop_writes is not >>> right. Does it really stop write io? mddev_suspend should be the >>> function that stop write request. From my understanding, >>> raid_postsuspend does two jobs. One is stopping sync thread. Two is >>> suspending array. >> >> MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is not just used in __md_stop_writes(), so I think >> it's not correct to to check this. For example, if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is >> set by raid_message(), then __md_stop_writes() will be skipped. > > Hi Kuai > > raid_message sets MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN and it stops the sync thread > synchronously. So it doesn't need __md_stop_writes. So from md and > dmraid, it has a rule. If you set MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, you're in the > process of stopping sync thread. There are so much problems here, I'm not sure if you really walk through all patches here. 1) stop the sync_thread synchronously is problematic, and raid_message() doesn't even hold 'reconfig_mutex' for md_reap_sync_thread(); 2) skip __md_stop_writes() because sycn_thread is stopped is wrong, __md_stop_writes() does more work. > >> >>> >>>> 3) raid_message can set/clear the flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN at anytime, >>>> and if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared while the array is suspended, >>>> new sync_thread can start unexpected. >>> >>> md_action_store doesn't check this either. If the array is suspended >>> and MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared, before patch01, sync thread can't >>> happen. So it looks like patch01 breaks the logic. >> >> The difference is that md/raid doen't need to frozen sync_thread while >> suspending the array for now. And I don't understand at all why sync >> thread can't happed before patch01. > > There is a condition you mentioned above -- the array is suspended. > Before patch01, if one array is suspended, the sync thread can't 3) before patch 1, sync_thread can still running even if array is suspended; And even without patch 1, raid_message() can still start new sync_thread: // assume sync_thread is not register raid_postsuspend raid_message md_stop_writes set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_NEEDED, &mddev->recovery) if (!mddev->suspended) md_wakeup_thread // new sync_thread is registered mddev_suspend > happen. Even raid_messages clears MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, the sync thread > can't start. After resume the array, the sync thread can start again. 4) I think I don't need to explain again why suspended should not be used to prevent starting new sync_thread; Thanks, Kuai > > Regards > Xiao >> >> Thanks, >> Kuai >> >>> >>> Regards >>> Xiao >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Fix above problems by using the new helper to suspend the array during >>>> suspend, also disallow raid_message() to change sync_thread status >>>> during suspend. >>>> >>>> Note that after commit f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread"), the >>>> test shell/lvconvert-raid-reshape.sh start to hang in stop_sync_thread(), >>>> and with previous fixes, the test won't hang there anymore, however, the >>>> test will still fail and complain that ext4 is corrupted. And with this >>>> patch, the test won't hang due to stop_sync_thread() or fail due to ext4 >>>> is corrupted anymore. However, there is still a deadlock related to >>>> dm-raid456 that will be fixed in following patches. >>>> >>>> Reported-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> >>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/e5e8afe2-e9a8-49a2-5ab0-958d4065c55e@redhat.com/ >>>> Fixes: 1af2048a3e87 ("dm raid: fix deadlock caused by premature md_stop_writes()") >>>> Fixes: 9dbd1aa3a81c ("dm raid: add reshaping support to the target") >>>> Fixes: f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread") >>>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/md/dm-raid.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- >>>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c >>>> index eb009d6bb03a..5ce3c6020b1b 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c >>>> @@ -3240,11 +3240,12 @@ static int raid_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv) >>>> rs->md.ro = 1; >>>> rs->md.in_sync = 1; >>>> >>>> - /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ >>>> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery); >>>> - >>>> /* Has to be held on running the array */ >>>> mddev_suspend_and_lock_nointr(&rs->md); >>>> + >>>> + /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ >>>> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); >>>> + >>>> r = md_run(&rs->md); >>>> rs->md.in_sync = 0; /* Assume already marked dirty */ >>>> if (r) { >>>> @@ -3722,6 +3723,9 @@ static int raid_message(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv, >>>> if (!mddev->pers || !mddev->pers->sync_request) >>>> return -EINVAL; >>>> >>>> + if (test_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) >>>> + return -EBUSY; >>>> + >>>> if (!strcasecmp(argv[0], "frozen")) >>>> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); >>>> else >>>> @@ -3791,15 +3795,31 @@ static void raid_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits) >>>> blk_limits_io_opt(limits, chunk_size_bytes * mddev_data_stripes(rs)); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static void raid_presuspend(struct dm_target *ti) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; >>>> + >>>> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); >>>> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); >>>> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static void raid_presuspend_undo(struct dm_target *ti) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; >>>> + >>>> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); >>>> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); >>>> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> static void raid_postsuspend(struct dm_target *ti) >>>> { >>>> struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; >>>> >>>> if (!test_and_set_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) { >>>> /* Writes have to be stopped before suspending to avoid deadlocks. */ >>>> - if (!test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery)) >>>> - md_stop_writes(&rs->md); >>>> - >>>> + md_stop_writes(&rs->md); >>>> mddev_suspend(&rs->md, false); >>>> } >>>> } >>>> @@ -4012,8 +4032,6 @@ static int raid_preresume(struct dm_target *ti) >>>> } >>>> >>>> /* Check for any resize/reshape on @rs and adjust/initiate */ >>>> - /* Be prepared for mddev_resume() in raid_resume() */ >>>> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); >>>> if (mddev->recovery_cp && mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector) { >>>> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED, &mddev->recovery); >>>> mddev->resync_min = mddev->recovery_cp; >>>> @@ -4056,9 +4074,9 @@ static void raid_resume(struct dm_target *ti) >>>> rs_set_capacity(rs); >>>> >>>> mddev_lock_nointr(mddev); >>>> - clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); >>>> mddev->ro = 0; >>>> mddev->in_sync = 0; >>>> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(mddev); >>>> mddev_unlock_and_resume(mddev); >>>> } >>>> } >>>> @@ -4074,6 +4092,8 @@ static struct target_type raid_target = { >>>> .message = raid_message, >>>> .iterate_devices = raid_iterate_devices, >>>> .io_hints = raid_io_hints, >>>> + .presuspend = raid_presuspend, >>>> + .presuspend_undo = raid_presuspend_undo, >>>> .postsuspend = raid_postsuspend, >>>> .preresume = raid_preresume, >>>> .resume = raid_resume, >>>> -- >>>> 2.39.2 >>>> >>> >>> . >>> >> > > > . >
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 3:53 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > 在 2024/02/19 15:27, Xiao Ni 写道: > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 2:34 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> 在 2024/02/18 12:53, Xiao Ni 写道: > >>> Hi Kuai > >>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 5:30 PM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > >>>> > >>>> 1) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that sync thread is frozen, > >>>> it only prevent new sync_thread to start, and it can't stop the > >>>> running sync thread; > >>> > >>> Agree with this > >>> > >>>> 2) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that writes are stopped, use > >>>> it as condition for md_stop_writes() in raid_postsuspend() doesn't > >>>> look correct. > >>> > >>> I don't agree with it. __md_stop_writes stops sync thread, so it needs > >>> to check this flag. And It looks like the name __md_stop_writes is not > >>> right. Does it really stop write io? mddev_suspend should be the > >>> function that stop write request. From my understanding, > >>> raid_postsuspend does two jobs. One is stopping sync thread. Two is > >>> suspending array. > >> > >> MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is not just used in __md_stop_writes(), so I think > >> it's not correct to to check this. For example, if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is > >> set by raid_message(), then __md_stop_writes() will be skipped. > > > > Hi Kuai > > > > raid_message sets MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN and it stops the sync thread > > synchronously. So it doesn't need __md_stop_writes. So from md and > > dmraid, it has a rule. If you set MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, you're in the > > process of stopping sync thread. > > There are so much problems here, I'm not sure if you really walk through > all patches here. I haven't read all of them. But as you mentioned, the following patches are based on patch01. They work together. I want to narrow the change to fix these regression problems. But it depends on the song's decision. > > 1) stop the sync_thread synchronously is problematic, and raid_message() > doesn't even hold 'reconfig_mutex' for md_reap_sync_thread(); > 2) skip __md_stop_writes() because sycn_thread is stopped is wrong, > __md_stop_writes() does more work. Agree with this. We can use the same way as action_store does. But we can do this later, not this patch set. > > > >> > >>> > >>>> 3) raid_message can set/clear the flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN at anytime, > >>>> and if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared while the array is suspended, > >>>> new sync_thread can start unexpected. > >>> > >>> md_action_store doesn't check this either. If the array is suspended > >>> and MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared, before patch01, sync thread can't > >>> happen. So it looks like patch01 breaks the logic. > >> > >> The difference is that md/raid doen't need to frozen sync_thread while > >> suspending the array for now. And I don't understand at all why sync > >> thread can't happed before patch01. > > > > There is a condition you mentioned above -- the array is suspended. > > Before patch01, if one array is suspended, the sync thread can't > 3) before patch 1, sync_thread can still running even if array is > suspended; > And even without patch 1, raid_message() can still start new > sync_thread: > > // assume sync_thread is not register > raid_postsuspend raid_message > md_stop_writes > set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_NEEDED, &mddev->recovery) > if (!mddev->suspended) > md_wakeup_thread > // new sync_thread is registered > mddev_suspend The array is not suspended in the above case. Before patch01, after mddev_suspend, sync thread can't start. But this looks like a problem. I'm not sure if dm has a way to handle the concurrency. In md, we have a new lock sync_mutex to protect this, right? If dm doesn't do this, dm-raid can do the same thing as md does. > > > happen. Even raid_messages clears MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, the sync thread > > can't start. After resume the array, the sync thread can start again. > > 4) I think I don't need to explain again why suspended should not be > used to prevent starting new sync_thread; Yes. I understand you. But I only follow the existing logic. It has been there for many years. Especially for dmraid/lvmraid, maybe there are some codes that depend on this logic. For such a change, I don't reject it 100%. I just want to say we need to be more careful. Best Regards Xiao > > Thanks, > Kuai > > > > > Regards > > Xiao > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Kuai > >> > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> Xiao > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Fix above problems by using the new helper to suspend the array during > >>>> suspend, also disallow raid_message() to change sync_thread status > >>>> during suspend. > >>>> > >>>> Note that after commit f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread"), the > >>>> test shell/lvconvert-raid-reshape.sh start to hang in stop_sync_thread(), > >>>> and with previous fixes, the test won't hang there anymore, however, the > >>>> test will still fail and complain that ext4 is corrupted. And with this > >>>> patch, the test won't hang due to stop_sync_thread() or fail due to ext4 > >>>> is corrupted anymore. However, there is still a deadlock related to > >>>> dm-raid456 that will be fixed in following patches. > >>>> > >>>> Reported-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> > >>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/e5e8afe2-e9a8-49a2-5ab0-958d4065c55e@redhat.com/ > >>>> Fixes: 1af2048a3e87 ("dm raid: fix deadlock caused by premature md_stop_writes()") > >>>> Fixes: 9dbd1aa3a81c ("dm raid: add reshaping support to the target") > >>>> Fixes: f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread") > >>>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> drivers/md/dm-raid.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > >>>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > >>>> index eb009d6bb03a..5ce3c6020b1b 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c > >>>> @@ -3240,11 +3240,12 @@ static int raid_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv) > >>>> rs->md.ro = 1; > >>>> rs->md.in_sync = 1; > >>>> > >>>> - /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ > >>>> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery); > >>>> - > >>>> /* Has to be held on running the array */ > >>>> mddev_suspend_and_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > >>>> + > >>>> + /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ > >>>> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > >>>> + > >>>> r = md_run(&rs->md); > >>>> rs->md.in_sync = 0; /* Assume already marked dirty */ > >>>> if (r) { > >>>> @@ -3722,6 +3723,9 @@ static int raid_message(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv, > >>>> if (!mddev->pers || !mddev->pers->sync_request) > >>>> return -EINVAL; > >>>> > >>>> + if (test_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) > >>>> + return -EBUSY; > >>>> + > >>>> if (!strcasecmp(argv[0], "frozen")) > >>>> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > >>>> else > >>>> @@ -3791,15 +3795,31 @@ static void raid_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits) > >>>> blk_limits_io_opt(limits, chunk_size_bytes * mddev_data_stripes(rs)); > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> +static void raid_presuspend(struct dm_target *ti) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > >>>> + > >>>> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > >>>> + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > >>>> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static void raid_presuspend_undo(struct dm_target *ti) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > >>>> + > >>>> + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); > >>>> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); > >>>> + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> static void raid_postsuspend(struct dm_target *ti) > >>>> { > >>>> struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; > >>>> > >>>> if (!test_and_set_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) { > >>>> /* Writes have to be stopped before suspending to avoid deadlocks. */ > >>>> - if (!test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery)) > >>>> - md_stop_writes(&rs->md); > >>>> - > >>>> + md_stop_writes(&rs->md); > >>>> mddev_suspend(&rs->md, false); > >>>> } > >>>> } > >>>> @@ -4012,8 +4032,6 @@ static int raid_preresume(struct dm_target *ti) > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> /* Check for any resize/reshape on @rs and adjust/initiate */ > >>>> - /* Be prepared for mddev_resume() in raid_resume() */ > >>>> - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > >>>> if (mddev->recovery_cp && mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector) { > >>>> set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED, &mddev->recovery); > >>>> mddev->resync_min = mddev->recovery_cp; > >>>> @@ -4056,9 +4074,9 @@ static void raid_resume(struct dm_target *ti) > >>>> rs_set_capacity(rs); > >>>> > >>>> mddev_lock_nointr(mddev); > >>>> - clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); > >>>> mddev->ro = 0; > >>>> mddev->in_sync = 0; > >>>> + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(mddev); > >>>> mddev_unlock_and_resume(mddev); > >>>> } > >>>> } > >>>> @@ -4074,6 +4092,8 @@ static struct target_type raid_target = { > >>>> .message = raid_message, > >>>> .iterate_devices = raid_iterate_devices, > >>>> .io_hints = raid_io_hints, > >>>> + .presuspend = raid_presuspend, > >>>> + .presuspend_undo = raid_presuspend_undo, > >>>> .postsuspend = raid_postsuspend, > >>>> .preresume = raid_preresume, > >>>> .resume = raid_resume, > >>>> -- > >>>> 2.39.2 > >>>> > >>> > >>> . > >>> > >> > > > > > > . > > >
diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c index eb009d6bb03a..5ce3c6020b1b 100644 --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c @@ -3240,11 +3240,12 @@ static int raid_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv) rs->md.ro = 1; rs->md.in_sync = 1; - /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery); - /* Has to be held on running the array */ mddev_suspend_and_lock_nointr(&rs->md); + + /* Keep array frozen until resume. */ + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); + r = md_run(&rs->md); rs->md.in_sync = 0; /* Assume already marked dirty */ if (r) { @@ -3722,6 +3723,9 @@ static int raid_message(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv, if (!mddev->pers || !mddev->pers->sync_request) return -EINVAL; + if (test_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) + return -EBUSY; + if (!strcasecmp(argv[0], "frozen")) set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); else @@ -3791,15 +3795,31 @@ static void raid_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits) blk_limits_io_opt(limits, chunk_size_bytes * mddev_data_stripes(rs)); } +static void raid_presuspend(struct dm_target *ti) +{ + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; + + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); + md_frozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); +} + +static void raid_presuspend_undo(struct dm_target *ti) +{ + struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; + + mddev_lock_nointr(&rs->md); + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(&rs->md); + mddev_unlock(&rs->md); +} + static void raid_postsuspend(struct dm_target *ti) { struct raid_set *rs = ti->private; if (!test_and_set_bit(RT_FLAG_RS_SUSPENDED, &rs->runtime_flags)) { /* Writes have to be stopped before suspending to avoid deadlocks. */ - if (!test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &rs->md.recovery)) - md_stop_writes(&rs->md); - + md_stop_writes(&rs->md); mddev_suspend(&rs->md, false); } } @@ -4012,8 +4032,6 @@ static int raid_preresume(struct dm_target *ti) } /* Check for any resize/reshape on @rs and adjust/initiate */ - /* Be prepared for mddev_resume() in raid_resume() */ - set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); if (mddev->recovery_cp && mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector) { set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED, &mddev->recovery); mddev->resync_min = mddev->recovery_cp; @@ -4056,9 +4074,9 @@ static void raid_resume(struct dm_target *ti) rs_set_capacity(rs); mddev_lock_nointr(mddev); - clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN, &mddev->recovery); mddev->ro = 0; mddev->in_sync = 0; + md_unfrozen_sync_thread(mddev); mddev_unlock_and_resume(mddev); } } @@ -4074,6 +4092,8 @@ static struct target_type raid_target = { .message = raid_message, .iterate_devices = raid_iterate_devices, .io_hints = raid_io_hints, + .presuspend = raid_presuspend, + .presuspend_undo = raid_presuspend_undo, .postsuspend = raid_postsuspend, .preresume = raid_preresume, .resume = raid_resume,