From patchwork Mon Apr 9 09:13:56 2018 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Sagi Grimberg X-Patchwork-Id: 10330859 Return-Path: Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.125]) by pdx-korg-patchwork.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B45EE6020F for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:14:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB9228A7A for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:14:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix, from userid 486) id A234428A80; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:14:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91BF028A7A for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:14:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751667AbeDIJOA (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2018 05:14:00 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f171.google.com ([209.85.128.171]:38402 "EHLO mail-wr0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750982AbeDIJN7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2018 05:13:59 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f171.google.com with SMTP id m13so8657688wrj.5 for ; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 02:13:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cdpw8JvkLwZdJS8jvzbMp5+x9jK8v77hZaozqu5JjJ4=; b=sWwQybMQqgI3NQh8od7rRd3iAeAyUGhCD0zUBdKmgIa2NvLSVBE76YeUesSlGxWgKe jAW+6RKv8dn6+lS9k7QeIdPh8Ox5/K5NSSBDJ8wcvS9OnX83yNxMI9/hiwnQ89oATV26 iG4LgT4XHtV98/s+7mgcBHizY1Di3ykhPOf9gTC7LQ9AEIfWLZhsDM3Ezb7I2E7qgFIT fAYDmmNBJoRUFkMgXxnt3DGrJeoVHsFnbUGGNk+9eHbBH+IFKL50Aetc1wqom9AnQe8n 3nZMAAjdNYlkAzhxP9BsZt/TTXtcpjGYoe/4aIZj+KGXLlP12WMgjewLsVp3eBpQ4IXC 5jiw== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EWGxqIyPTwppSvv47XoOKXgG7yU6tTDhiP5FQET1hDhpTNcLGh paEdL0aGuAb0Ok1eukd1W0Gecxa7 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/G1Iw5Nmeq6VLzW5EHPW/2Lbxeksrep8aw6IwAGsKy9VjDa/6rh+kxmBjXFZKjVUFqRM3Zxg== X-Received: by 10.223.181.148 with SMTP id c20mr27233432wre.65.1523265238309; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 02:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.64.169] (bzq-219-42-90.isdn.bezeqint.net. [62.219.42.90]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 80sm253641wmk.46.2018.04.09.02.13.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Apr 2018 02:13:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: BUG at IP: blk_mq_get_request+0x23e/0x390 on 4.16.0-rc7 To: Yi Zhang , Ming Lei Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org References: <682acdbe-7624-14d6-36e0-e2dd4c6b771f@grimberg.me> <256ebbe9-d932-a826-977b-5a5cb8483755@redhat.com> <20180408104433.GB29020@ming.t460p> <20180408104801.GC29020@ming.t460p> <343d151b-c953-c5d6-0ce6-f08c390ae8aa@grimberg.me> <20180408110417.GA19252@ming.t460p> <2ed81c04-b5e4-7d87-5311-34975fd67f98@grimberg.me> <20180408125735.GA23106@ming.t460p> <20180409024722.GC26619@ming.t460p> <3760790a-e3c9-73d4-5191-16320f6cdbde@grimberg.me> <9eb1d6ba-3994-596f-1b90-38a9b879f416@redhat.com> From: Sagi Grimberg Message-ID: Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 12:13:56 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9eb1d6ba-3994-596f-1b90-38a9b879f416@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP > Hi Sagi > Sorry for the late response, bellow patch works, here is the full log: Thanks for testing! Now that we isolated the issue, the question is if this fix is correct given that we are guaranteed that the connect context will run on an online cpu? another reference to the patch (we can make the pr_warn a pr_debug): diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c index 75336848f7a7..81ced3096433 100644 --- a/block/blk-mq.c +++ b/block/blk-mq.c @@ -444,6 +444,10 @@ struct request *blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx(struct request_queue *q, return ERR_PTR(-EXDEV); } cpu = cpumask_first_and(alloc_data.hctx->cpumask, cpu_online_mask); + if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) { + pr_warn("no online cpu for hctx %d\n", hctx_idx); + cpu = cpumask_first(alloc_data.hctx->cpumask); + } alloc_data.ctx = __blk_mq_get_ctx(q, cpu);