| Message ID | 20240112070000.4161982-1-ming.lei@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | scsi: core: move scsi_host_busy() out of host lock for waking up EH handler | expand |
On 1/12/24 08:00, Ming Lei wrote: > Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock > every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. > > This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: > > - N hardware queues > - queue depth is M for each hardware queue > - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests > > If recovery is triggered in case that all requests are in-flight, each > scsi_eh_wakeup() is strictly serialized, when scsi_eh_wakeup() is called > for the last in-flight request, scsi_host_busy() has been run for (N * M - 1) > times, and request has been iterated for (N*M - 1) * (N * M) times. > > If both N and M are big enough, hard lockup can be triggered on acquiring > host lock, and it is observed on mpi3mr(128 hw queues, queue depth 8169). > > Fix the issue by calling scsi_host_busy() outside host lock, and we > don't need host lock for getting busy count because host lock never > covers that. > Can you share details for the hard lockup? I do agree that scsi_host_busy() is an expensive operation, so it might not be ideal to call it under a spin lock. But I wonder where the lockup comes in here. Care to explain? And if it leads to a lockup, aren't other instances calling scsi_host_busy() under a spinlock affected, as well? Cheers, Hannes
On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 12:12:57PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 1/12/24 08:00, Ming Lei wrote: > > Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock > > every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. > > > > This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: > > > > - N hardware queues > > - queue depth is M for each hardware queue > > - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests > > > > If recovery is triggered in case that all requests are in-flight, each > > scsi_eh_wakeup() is strictly serialized, when scsi_eh_wakeup() is called > > for the last in-flight request, scsi_host_busy() has been run for (N * M - 1) > > times, and request has been iterated for (N*M - 1) * (N * M) times. > > > > If both N and M are big enough, hard lockup can be triggered on acquiring > > host lock, and it is observed on mpi3mr(128 hw queues, queue depth 8169). > > > > Fix the issue by calling scsi_host_busy() outside host lock, and we > > don't need host lock for getting busy count because host lock never > > covers that. > > > Can you share details for the hard lockup? > I do agree that scsi_host_busy() is an expensive operation, so it > might not be ideal to call it under a spin lock. > But I wonder where the lockup comes in here. > Care to explain? Recovery happens when there is N * M inflight requests, then scsi_dec_host_busy() can be called for each inflight request/scmnd from irq context. host lock serializes every scsi_eh_wakeup(). Given each hardware queue has its own irq handler, so there could be one request, scsi_dec_host_busy() is called and the host lock is spinned until it is released from scsi_dec_host_busy() for all requests from all other hardware queues. The spin time can be long enough to trigger the hard lockup if N and M is big enough, and the total wait time can be: (N - 1) * M * time_taken_in_scsi_host_busy(). Meantime the same story happens on scsi_eh_inc_host_failed() which is called from softirq context, so host lock spin can be much more worse. It is observed on mpi3mr with 128(N) hw queues and 8169(M) queue depth. > > And if it leads to a lockup, aren't other instances calling scsi_host_busy() > under a spinlock affected, as well? It is only possible when it is called in per-command situation. Thanks, Ming
On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 7:43 AM Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 12:12:57PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > > On 1/12/24 08:00, Ming Lei wrote: > > > Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock > > > every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. > > > > > > This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: > > > > > > - N hardware queues > > > - queue depth is M for each hardware queue > > > - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests > > > > > > If recovery is triggered in case that all requests are in-flight, each > > > scsi_eh_wakeup() is strictly serialized, when scsi_eh_wakeup() is called > > > for the last in-flight request, scsi_host_busy() has been run for (N * M - 1) > > > times, and request has been iterated for (N*M - 1) * (N * M) times. > > > > > > If both N and M are big enough, hard lockup can be triggered on acquiring > > > host lock, and it is observed on mpi3mr(128 hw queues, queue depth 8169). > > > > > > Fix the issue by calling scsi_host_busy() outside host lock, and we > > > don't need host lock for getting busy count because host lock never > > > covers that. > > > > > Can you share details for the hard lockup? > > I do agree that scsi_host_busy() is an expensive operation, so it > > might not be ideal to call it under a spin lock. > > But I wonder where the lockup comes in here. > > Care to explain? > > Recovery happens when there is N * M inflight requests, then scsi_dec_host_busy() > can be called for each inflight request/scmnd from irq context. > > host lock serializes every scsi_eh_wakeup(). > > Given each hardware queue has its own irq handler, so there could be one > request, scsi_dec_host_busy() is called and the host lock is spinned until > it is released from scsi_dec_host_busy() for all requests from all other > hardware queues. > > The spin time can be long enough to trigger the hard lockup if N and M > is big enough, and the total wait time can be: > > (N - 1) * M * time_taken_in_scsi_host_busy(). > > Meantime the same story happens on scsi_eh_inc_host_failed() which is > called from softirq context, so host lock spin can be much more worse. > > It is observed on mpi3mr with 128(N) hw queues and 8169(M) queue depth. > > > > > And if it leads to a lockup, aren't other instances calling scsi_host_busy() > > under a spinlock affected, as well? > > It is only possible when it is called in per-command situation. > > > Thanks, > Ming > I can't see why this wouldn't work, or cause a problem with a lost wakeup, but the cost of iterating to obtain the host_busy value is still being paid, just outside the host_lock. If this has triggered a hard lockup, should we revisit the algorithm, e.g. are we still delaying EH wakeup for a noticeable amount of time? O(n^2) algorithms in the kernel don't seem like the best idea. In any case... Reviewed-by: Ewan D. Milne <emilne@redhat.com> -Ewan
On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 02:34:52PM -0500, Ewan Milne wrote: > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 7:43 AM Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 12:12:57PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > > > On 1/12/24 08:00, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock > > > > every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. > > > > > > > > This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: > > > > > > > > - N hardware queues > > > > - queue depth is M for each hardware queue > > > > - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests > > > > > > > > If recovery is triggered in case that all requests are in-flight, each > > > > scsi_eh_wakeup() is strictly serialized, when scsi_eh_wakeup() is called > > > > for the last in-flight request, scsi_host_busy() has been run for (N * M - 1) > > > > times, and request has been iterated for (N*M - 1) * (N * M) times. > > > > > > > > If both N and M are big enough, hard lockup can be triggered on acquiring > > > > host lock, and it is observed on mpi3mr(128 hw queues, queue depth 8169). > > > > > > > > Fix the issue by calling scsi_host_busy() outside host lock, and we > > > > don't need host lock for getting busy count because host lock never > > > > covers that. > > > > > > > Can you share details for the hard lockup? > > > I do agree that scsi_host_busy() is an expensive operation, so it > > > might not be ideal to call it under a spin lock. > > > But I wonder where the lockup comes in here. > > > Care to explain? > > > > Recovery happens when there is N * M inflight requests, then scsi_dec_host_busy() > > can be called for each inflight request/scmnd from irq context. > > > > host lock serializes every scsi_eh_wakeup(). > > > > Given each hardware queue has its own irq handler, so there could be one > > request, scsi_dec_host_busy() is called and the host lock is spinned until > > it is released from scsi_dec_host_busy() for all requests from all other > > hardware queues. > > > > The spin time can be long enough to trigger the hard lockup if N and M > > is big enough, and the total wait time can be: > > > > (N - 1) * M * time_taken_in_scsi_host_busy(). > > > > Meantime the same story happens on scsi_eh_inc_host_failed() which is > > called from softirq context, so host lock spin can be much more worse. > > > > It is observed on mpi3mr with 128(N) hw queues and 8169(M) queue depth. > > > > > > > > And if it leads to a lockup, aren't other instances calling scsi_host_busy() > > > under a spinlock affected, as well? > > > > It is only possible when it is called in per-command situation. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Ming > > > > I can't see why this wouldn't work, or cause a problem with a lost wakeup, > but the cost of iterating to obtain the host_busy value is still being paid, > just outside the host_lock. If this has triggered a hard lockup, should > we revisit the algorithm, e.g. are we still delaying EH wakeup for a noticeable > amount of time? SCSI EH is designed to start handling until all in-flight commands are failed, so it waits until all requests are failed first. > O(n^2) algorithms in the kernel don't seem like the best idea. It is actually O(n) because each hardware queue handles request in parallel. It is degraded to O(n^2) or O(n * m) just because of shared host lock. Single or N scsi_host_busy() won't take too long without host lock, what matters is actually the per-host lock spin time which can be accumulated as too big. > > In any case... > Reviewed-by: Ewan D. Milne <emilne@redhat.com> Thanks for the review!
On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 6:59 PM Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 02:34:52PM -0500, Ewan Milne wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 7:43 AM Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 12:12:57PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > > > > On 1/12/24 08:00, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > > Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock > > > > > every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. > > > > > > > > > > This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: > > > > > > > > > > - N hardware queues > > > > > - queue depth is M for each hardware queue > > > > > - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests > > > > > > > > > > If recovery is triggered in case that all requests are in-flight, each > > > > > scsi_eh_wakeup() is strictly serialized, when scsi_eh_wakeup() is called > > > > > for the last in-flight request, scsi_host_busy() has been run for (N * M - 1) > > > > > times, and request has been iterated for (N*M - 1) * (N * M) times. > > > > > > > > > > If both N and M are big enough, hard lockup can be triggered on acquiring > > > > > host lock, and it is observed on mpi3mr(128 hw queues, queue depth 8169). > > > > > > > > > > Fix the issue by calling scsi_host_busy() outside host lock, and we > > > > > don't need host lock for getting busy count because host lock never > > > > > covers that. > > > > > > > > > Can you share details for the hard lockup? > > > > I do agree that scsi_host_busy() is an expensive operation, so it > > > > might not be ideal to call it under a spin lock. > > > > But I wonder where the lockup comes in here. > > > > Care to explain? > > > > > > Recovery happens when there is N * M inflight requests, then scsi_dec_host_busy() > > > can be called for each inflight request/scmnd from irq context. > > > > > > host lock serializes every scsi_eh_wakeup(). > > > > > > Given each hardware queue has its own irq handler, so there could be one > > > request, scsi_dec_host_busy() is called and the host lock is spinned until > > > it is released from scsi_dec_host_busy() for all requests from all other > > > hardware queues. > > > > > > The spin time can be long enough to trigger the hard lockup if N and M > > > is big enough, and the total wait time can be: > > > > > > (N - 1) * M * time_taken_in_scsi_host_busy(). > > > > > > Meantime the same story happens on scsi_eh_inc_host_failed() which is > > > called from softirq context, so host lock spin can be much more worse. > > > > > > It is observed on mpi3mr with 128(N) hw queues and 8169(M) queue depth. > > > > > > > > > > > And if it leads to a lockup, aren't other instances calling scsi_host_busy() > > > > under a spinlock affected, as well? > > > > > > It is only possible when it is called in per-command situation. > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Ming > > > > > > > I can't see why this wouldn't work, or cause a problem with a lost wakeup, > > but the cost of iterating to obtain the host_busy value is still being paid, > > just outside the host_lock. If this has triggered a hard lockup, should > > we revisit the algorithm, e.g. are we still delaying EH wakeup for a noticeable > > amount of time? > > SCSI EH is designed to start handling until all in-flight commands are > failed, so it waits until all requests are failed first. > > > O(n^2) algorithms in the kernel don't seem like the best idea. > > It is actually O(n) because each hardware queue handles request > in parallel. > > It is degraded to O(n^2) or O(n * m) just because of shared host lock. > > Single or N scsi_host_busy() won't take too long without host lock, what > matters is actually the per-host lock spin time which can be accumulated > as too big. > > > > > In any case... > > Reviewed-by: Ewan D. Milne <emilne@redhat.com> > > Thanks for the review! > > > -- > Ming > > Reviewed-by: Sathya Prakash Veerichetty <safhya.prakash@broadcom.com> Tested-by: Sathya Prakash Veerichetty <safhya.prakash@broadcom.com>
On 1/11/24 23:00, Ming Lei wrote: > @@ -87,8 +87,10 @@ void scsi_schedule_eh(struct Scsi_Host *shost) > > if (scsi_host_set_state(shost, SHOST_RECOVERY) == 0 || > scsi_host_set_state(shost, SHOST_CANCEL_RECOVERY) == 0) { > + unsigned int busy = scsi_host_busy(shost); > + > shost->host_eh_scheduled++; > - scsi_eh_wakeup(shost); > + scsi_eh_wakeup(shost, busy); > } No new variable is needed here. If this patch is reposted, please change the above into the following: + scsi_eh_wakeup(shost, scsi_host_busy(shost)); With or without that additional change: Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:00:00 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock > every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. > > This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: > > - N hardware queues > - queue depth is M for each hardware queue > - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests > > [...] Applied to 6.8/scsi-fixes, thanks! [1/1] scsi: core: move scsi_host_busy() out of host lock for waking up EH handler https://git.kernel.org/mkp/scsi/c/4373534a9850
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 11:01 AM Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:00:00 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > > Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock > > every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. > > > > This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: > > > > - N hardware queues > > - queue depth is M for each hardware queue > > - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests > > > > [...] > > Applied to 6.8/scsi-fixes, thanks! > > [1/1] scsi: core: move scsi_host_busy() out of host lock for waking up EH handler > https://git.kernel.org/mkp/scsi/c/4373534a9850 Hi Martin, When I started to backport this commit, I found it was merged as wrong, the point is that scsi_host_busy() needs to be moved out of host lock. I will send one new patch to fix it. Thanks, Ming
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c index c67cdcdc3ba8..6743eb88e0a5 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c @@ -61,11 +61,11 @@ static int scsi_eh_try_stu(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd); static enum scsi_disposition scsi_try_to_abort_cmd(const struct scsi_host_template *, struct scsi_cmnd *); -void scsi_eh_wakeup(struct Scsi_Host *shost) +void scsi_eh_wakeup(struct Scsi_Host *shost, unsigned int busy) { lockdep_assert_held(shost->host_lock); - if (scsi_host_busy(shost) == shost->host_failed) { + if (busy == shost->host_failed) { trace_scsi_eh_wakeup(shost); wake_up_process(shost->ehandler); SCSI_LOG_ERROR_RECOVERY(5, shost_printk(KERN_INFO, shost, @@ -87,8 +87,10 @@ void scsi_schedule_eh(struct Scsi_Host *shost) if (scsi_host_set_state(shost, SHOST_RECOVERY) == 0 || scsi_host_set_state(shost, SHOST_CANCEL_RECOVERY) == 0) { + unsigned int busy = scsi_host_busy(shost); + shost->host_eh_scheduled++; - scsi_eh_wakeup(shost); + scsi_eh_wakeup(shost, busy); } spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags); @@ -283,10 +285,11 @@ static void scsi_eh_inc_host_failed(struct rcu_head *head) struct scsi_cmnd *scmd = container_of(head, typeof(*scmd), rcu); struct Scsi_Host *shost = scmd->device->host; unsigned long flags; + unsigned int busy = scsi_host_busy(shost); spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags); shost->host_failed++; - scsi_eh_wakeup(shost); + scsi_eh_wakeup(shost, busy); spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags); } diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c index cf3864f72093..df5ac03d5d6c 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c @@ -278,9 +278,11 @@ static void scsi_dec_host_busy(struct Scsi_Host *shost, struct scsi_cmnd *cmd) rcu_read_lock(); __clear_bit(SCMD_STATE_INFLIGHT, &cmd->state); if (unlikely(scsi_host_in_recovery(shost))) { + unsigned int busy = scsi_host_busy(shost); + spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags); if (shost->host_failed || shost->host_eh_scheduled) - scsi_eh_wakeup(shost); + scsi_eh_wakeup(shost, busy); spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags); } rcu_read_unlock(); diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_priv.h b/drivers/scsi/scsi_priv.h index 3f0dfb97db6b..1fbfe1b52c9f 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_priv.h +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_priv.h @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ extern void scmd_eh_abort_handler(struct work_struct *work); extern enum blk_eh_timer_return scsi_timeout(struct request *req); extern int scsi_error_handler(void *host); extern enum scsi_disposition scsi_decide_disposition(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd); -extern void scsi_eh_wakeup(struct Scsi_Host *shost); +extern void scsi_eh_wakeup(struct Scsi_Host *shost, unsigned int busy); extern void scsi_eh_scmd_add(struct scsi_cmnd *); void scsi_eh_ready_devs(struct Scsi_Host *shost, struct list_head *work_q,
Inside scsi_eh_wakeup(), scsi_host_busy() is called & checked with host lock every time for deciding if error handler kthread needs to be waken up. This way can be too heavy in case of recovery, such as: - N hardware queues - queue depth is M for each hardware queue - each scsi_host_busy() iterates over (N * M) tag/requests If recovery is triggered in case that all requests are in-flight, each scsi_eh_wakeup() is strictly serialized, when scsi_eh_wakeup() is called for the last in-flight request, scsi_host_busy() has been run for (N * M - 1) times, and request has been iterated for (N*M - 1) * (N * M) times. If both N and M are big enough, hard lockup can be triggered on acquiring host lock, and it is observed on mpi3mr(128 hw queues, queue depth 8169). Fix the issue by calling scsi_host_busy() outside host lock, and we don't need host lock for getting busy count because host lock never covers that. Cc: Ewan Milne <emilne@redhat.com> Fixes: 6eb045e092ef ("scsi: core: avoid host-wide host_busy counter for scsi_mq") Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> --- BTW, another way is to wake up EH handler unconditionally, and it should work too. drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 11 +++++++---- drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c | 4 +++- drivers/scsi/scsi_priv.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)