From 513fee2aee13cc4fd92dbeca0004581860c0ed26 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Baolin Wang Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 13:58:15 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] blk-cgroup: Use cond_resched() when destroy blkgs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit [ Upstream commit 6c635caef410aa757befbd8857c1eadde5cc22ed ] On !PREEMPT kernel, we can get below softlockup when doing stress testing with creating and destroying block cgroup repeatly. The reason is it may take a long time to acquire the queue's lock in the loop of blkcg_destroy_blkgs(), or the system can accumulate a huge number of blkgs in pathological cases. We can add a need_resched() check on each loop and release locks and do cond_resched() if true to avoid this issue, since the blkcg_destroy_blkgs() is not called from atomic contexts. [ 4757.010308] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#11 stuck for 94s! [ 4757.010698] Call trace: [ 4757.010700]  blkcg_destroy_blkgs+0x68/0x150 [ 4757.010701]  cgwb_release_workfn+0x104/0x158 [ 4757.010702]  process_one_work+0x1bc/0x3f0 [ 4757.010704]  worker_thread+0x164/0x468 [ 4757.010705]  kthread+0x108/0x138 Suggested-by: Tejun Heo Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- block/blk-cgroup.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c index 3d34ac02d76e..cb3d44d20005 100644 --- a/block/blk-cgroup.c +++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c @@ -1089,6 +1089,8 @@ static void blkcg_css_offline(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css) */ void blkcg_destroy_blkgs(struct blkcg *blkcg) { + might_sleep(); + spin_lock_irq(&blkcg->lock); while (!hlist_empty(&blkcg->blkg_list)) { @@ -1096,14 +1098,20 @@ void blkcg_destroy_blkgs(struct blkcg *blkcg) struct blkcg_gq, blkcg_node); struct request_queue *q = blkg->q; - if (spin_trylock(&q->queue_lock)) { - blkg_destroy(blkg); - spin_unlock(&q->queue_lock); - } else { + if (need_resched() || !spin_trylock(&q->queue_lock)) { + /* + * Given that the system can accumulate a huge number + * of blkgs in pathological cases, check to see if we + * need to rescheduling to avoid softlockup. + */ spin_unlock_irq(&blkcg->lock); - cpu_relax(); + cond_resched(); spin_lock_irq(&blkcg->lock); + continue; } + + blkg_destroy(blkg); + spin_unlock(&q->queue_lock); } spin_unlock_irq(&blkcg->lock);