xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfs: shutdown xfs_sync_worker before the log

To: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: shutdown xfs_sync_worker before the log
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:36:18 +1000
Cc: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4FD65F00.1010309@xxxxxxx>
References: <20120323174327.GU7762@xxxxxxx> <20120514203449.GE16099@xxxxxxx> <20120516015626.GN25351@dastard> <20120516170402.GD3963@xxxxxxx> <20120517071658.GP25351@dastard> <20120524223952.GU16099@xxxxxxx> <20120525204536.GA4721@xxxxxxx> <20120606042647.GK22848@dastard> <20120611204516.GR4721@xxxxxxx> <4FD65F00.1010309@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 04:11:28PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 06/11/12 15:45, Ben Myers wrote:
> ...
> 
> >That sounds pretty good.  In particular, I think that making the start
> >and stop of the workqueues correct should be the high priority.  I'm not
> >as concerned about the accuracy of the names, or cleaning up xfs_sync.c
> >and xfs_iget.c, but cleanups are worth doing too.
> >
> >I hit a crash related to the xfslogd workqueue awhile back.  Mark has
> >taken it up, so there might be a little coordination to do with him.
> >
> >Regards,
> >     Ben
> 
> To not leave a teaser out there:
> 
> PID: 25879  TASK: ffff88012ac20340  CPU: 3   COMMAND: "kworker/3:3"
>  #0 [ffff8801a72af920] machine_kexec at ffffffff810244e9
>  #1 [ffff8801a72af990] crash_kexec at ffffffff8108d053
>  #2 [ffff8801a72afa60] oops_end at ffffffff813ad1b8
>  #3 [ffff8801a72afa90] no_context at ffffffff8102bd48
>  #4 [ffff8801a72afae0] __bad_area_nosemaphore at ffffffff8102c04d
>  #5 [ffff8801a72afb30] bad_area_nosemaphore at ffffffff8102c12e
>  #6 [ffff8801a72afb40] do_page_fault at ffffffff813afaee
>  #7 [ffff8801a72afc50] page_fault at ffffffff813ac635
>     [exception RIP: xlog_assign_tail_lsn_locked+72]
>     RIP: ffffffffa040da68  RSP: ffff8801a72afd00  RFLAGS: 00010246
>     RAX: 0000000000000000  RBX: 0000000000000000  RCX: dead000000200200
>     RDX: ffff88013b32d550  RSI: dead000000100100  RDI: ffff88013b32d550
>     RBP: ffff8801a72afd10   R8: ffff8801a72ae000   R9: 0000000000000000
>     R10: 0000000000000000  R11: 0000000000000000  R12: ffff88013b32d568
>     R13: 0000000000000001  R14: ffff8801a72afd90  R15: ffff88013b32d540
>     ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff  CS: 0010  SS: 0018
>  #8 [ffff8801a72afd18] xfs_trans_ail_delete_bulk at ffffffffa0414b2a [xfs]
>  #9 [ffff8801a72afd78] xfs_buf_iodone at ffffffffa04119c7 [xfs]
> #10 [ffff8801a72afdb8] xfs_buf_do_callbacks at ffffffffa041166c [xfs]
> #11 [ffff8801a72afdd8] xfs_buf_iodone_callbacks at ffffffffa04117de [xfs]
> #12 [ffff8801a72afdf8] xfs_buf_iodone_work at ffffffffa03ad7e1 [xfs]
> #13 [ffff8801a72afe18] process_one_work at ffffffff8104c53b
> #14 [ffff8801a72afe68] worker_thread at ffffffff8104f0e3
> #15 [ffff8801a72afee8] kthread at ffffffff8105395e
> #16 [ffff8801a72aff48] kernel_thread_helper at ffffffff813b3ae4
> 
> I am just digging through that crash. It appears that xfs_umountfs()
> did a good job in cleaning the AIL and the m_ddev_targp, but it
> needs to wait for the xfslogd to be finished before deallocating the
> log.

It is supposed to be already idle before the log is torn down.  The
log is forced synchronously while flushes remaining CIL items, then
the AIL is emptied synchronously. That should result in no
outstanding log operations to be run. Then xfs_log_unmount_write()
is called, which is supposed to wait for the log write to complete
before allowing the log to be torn down in xfs_log_unmount(). i.e.
it is also synchronous.

So the question that needs to be answered is this: what is the
transaction/checkpoint that is being completed here?

> Since workqueues are cheap, maybe it would be smart to have a
> per-filesystem xfslogd too.

That's overkill. If all we need is to ensure that we have emptied
the logd wq, then a synchronous flush is all that is necessary. But
first we need to find the cause of the above problem, and I'd
suggest a new thread for that...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>