Christian Borntraeger
2017-Nov-21 08:35 UTC
4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk
On 11/20/2017 09:52 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:> On 11/20/2017 01:49 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> >> >> On 11/20/2017 08:42 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 11/20/2017 12:29 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/20/2017 08:20 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 15:42 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>>>> This is >>>>>> >>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1141) * are mapped to it. >>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >>>>> >>>>> Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning >>>>> was introduced? I think that warning was introduced through the following >>>>> commit: >>>> >>>> This was more a cut'n'paste to show which warning triggered since line numbers are somewhat volatile. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> commit fd1270d5df6a005e1248e87042159a799cc4b2c9 >>>>> Date: Wed Apr 16 09:23:48 2014 -0600 >>>>> >>>>> blk-mq: don't use preempt_count() to check for right CPU >>>>> >>>>> UP or CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE will return 0, and what we really >>>>> want to check is whether or not we are on the right CPU. >>>>> So don't make PREEMPT part of this, just test the CPU in >>>>> the mask directly. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, I think that warning is appropriate and useful. So the next step >>>>> is to figure out what work item was involved and why that work item got >>>>> executed on the wrong CPU. >>>> >>>> It seems to be related to virtio-blk (is triggered by fio on such disks). Your comment basically >>>> says: "no this is not a known issue" then :-) >>>> I will try to take a dump to find out the work item >>> >>> blk-mq does not attempt to freeze/sync existing work if a CPU goes away, >>> and we reconfigure the mappings. So I don't think the above is unexpected, >>> if you are doing CPU hot unplug while running a fio job. >> >> I did a cpu hot plug (adding a CPU) and I started fio AFTER that. > > OK, that's different, we should not be triggering a warning for that. > What does your machine/virtblk topology look like in terms of CPUS, > nr of queues for virtblk, etc?FWIW, 4.11 does work, 4.12 and later is broken.> > You can probably get this info the easiest by just doing a: > > # find /sys/kernel/debug/block/virtX > > replace virtX with your virtblk device name. Generate this info both > before and after the hotplug event.It happens in all variants (1 cpu to 2 or 16 to 17 and independent of the number of disks). What I can see is that the block layer does not yet sees the new CPU: [root at zhyp137 ~]# find /sys/kernel/debug/block/vd* /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0 /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0 /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/completed /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/merged /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/dispatched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/rq_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/active /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/run /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/queued /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/dispatched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/io_poll /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/sched_tags_bitmap /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/sched_tags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/tags_bitmap /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/tags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/ctx_map /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/busy /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/dispatch /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/flags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/state /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/dispatch /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/starved /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/batching /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/write_next_rq /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/write_fifo_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/read_next_rq /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/read_fifo_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/write_hints /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/state /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/requeue_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/poll_stat --> in host virsh setvcpu zhyp137 2 [root at zhyp137 ~]# chcpu -e 1 CPU 1 enabled [root at zhyp137 ~]# find /sys/kernel/debug/block/vd* /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0 /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0 /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/completed /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/merged /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/dispatched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/rq_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/active /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/run /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/queued /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/dispatched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/io_poll /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/sched_tags_bitmap /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/sched_tags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/tags_bitmap /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/tags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/ctx_map /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/busy /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/dispatch /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/flags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/state /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/dispatch /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/starved /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/batching /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/write_next_rq /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/write_fifo_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/read_next_rq /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/read_fifo_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/write_hints /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/state /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/requeue_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/poll_stat If I already start with 2 cpus it looks like the following (all cpu1 entries are new) [root at zhyp137 ~]# find /sys/kernel/debug/block/vd* /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0 /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu1 /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu1/completed /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu1/merged /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu1/dispatched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu1/rq_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0 /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/completed /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/merged /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/dispatched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/cpu0/rq_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/active /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/run /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/queued /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/dispatched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/io_poll /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/sched_tags_bitmap /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/sched_tags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/tags_bitmap /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/tags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/ctx_map /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/busy /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/dispatch /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/flags /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/hctx0/state /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/dispatch /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/starved /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/batching /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/write_next_rq /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/write_fifo_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/read_next_rq /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/sched/read_fifo_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/write_hints /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/state /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/requeue_list /sys/kernel/debug/block/vda/poll_stat
Christian Borntraeger
2017-Nov-21 09:50 UTC
4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk
On 11/21/2017 09:35 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:> > > On 11/20/2017 09:52 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 11/20/2017 01:49 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 11/20/2017 08:42 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 11/20/2017 12:29 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 11/20/2017 08:20 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 15:42 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>>>>> This is >>>>>>> >>>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1141) * are mapped to it. >>>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >>>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >>>>>> >>>>>> Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning >>>>>> was introduced? I think that warning was introduced through the following >>>>>> commit: >>>>> >>>>> This was more a cut'n'paste to show which warning triggered since line numbers are somewhat volatile. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> commit fd1270d5df6a005e1248e87042159a799cc4b2c9 >>>>>> Date: Wed Apr 16 09:23:48 2014 -0600 >>>>>> >>>>>> blk-mq: don't use preempt_count() to check for right CPU >>>>>> >>>>>> UP or CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE will return 0, and what we really >>>>>> want to check is whether or not we are on the right CPU. >>>>>> So don't make PREEMPT part of this, just test the CPU in >>>>>> the mask directly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyway, I think that warning is appropriate and useful. So the next step >>>>>> is to figure out what work item was involved and why that work item got >>>>>> executed on the wrong CPU. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to be related to virtio-blk (is triggered by fio on such disks). Your comment basically >>>>> says: "no this is not a known issue" then :-) >>>>> I will try to take a dump to find out the work item >>>> >>>> blk-mq does not attempt to freeze/sync existing work if a CPU goes away, >>>> and we reconfigure the mappings. So I don't think the above is unexpected, >>>> if you are doing CPU hot unplug while running a fio job. >>> >>> I did a cpu hot plug (adding a CPU) and I started fio AFTER that. >> >> OK, that's different, we should not be triggering a warning for that. >> What does your machine/virtblk topology look like in terms of CPUS, >> nr of queues for virtblk, etc? > > FWIW, 4.11 does work, 4.12 and later is broken.In fact: 4.12 is fine, 4.12.14 is broken.
Christian Borntraeger
2017-Nov-21 10:14 UTC
4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk (also 4.12 stable)
On 11/21/2017 10:50 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:> > > On 11/21/2017 09:35 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> >> >> On 11/20/2017 09:52 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 11/20/2017 01:49 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/20/2017 08:42 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On 11/20/2017 12:29 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11/20/2017 08:20 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 15:42 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>>>>>> This is >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1141) * are mapped to it. >>>>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >>>>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>>>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>>>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>>>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning >>>>>>> was introduced? I think that warning was introduced through the following >>>>>>> commit: >>>>>> >>>>>> This was more a cut'n'paste to show which warning triggered since line numbers are somewhat volatile. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> commit fd1270d5df6a005e1248e87042159a799cc4b2c9 >>>>>>> Date: Wed Apr 16 09:23:48 2014 -0600 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> blk-mq: don't use preempt_count() to check for right CPU >>>>>>> >>>>>>> UP or CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE will return 0, and what we really >>>>>>> want to check is whether or not we are on the right CPU. >>>>>>> So don't make PREEMPT part of this, just test the CPU in >>>>>>> the mask directly. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyway, I think that warning is appropriate and useful. So the next step >>>>>>> is to figure out what work item was involved and why that work item got >>>>>>> executed on the wrong CPU. >>>>>> >>>>>> It seems to be related to virtio-blk (is triggered by fio on such disks). Your comment basically >>>>>> says: "no this is not a known issue" then :-) >>>>>> I will try to take a dump to find out the work item >>>>> >>>>> blk-mq does not attempt to freeze/sync existing work if a CPU goes away, >>>>> and we reconfigure the mappings. So I don't think the above is unexpected, >>>>> if you are doing CPU hot unplug while running a fio job. >>>> >>>> I did a cpu hot plug (adding a CPU) and I started fio AFTER that. >>> >>> OK, that's different, we should not be triggering a warning for that. >>> What does your machine/virtblk topology look like in terms of CPUS, >>> nr of queues for virtblk, etc? >> >> FWIW, 4.11 does work, 4.12 and later is broken. > > In fact: 4.12 is fine, 4.12.14 is broken.Bisect points to 1b5a7455d345b223d3a4658a9e5fce985b7998c1 is the first bad commit commit 1b5a7455d345b223d3a4658a9e5fce985b7998c1 Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de> Date: Mon Jun 26 12:20:57 2017 +0200 blk-mq: Create hctx for each present CPU commit 4b855ad37194f7bdbb200ce7a1c7051fecb56a08 upstream. Currently we only create hctx for online CPUs, which can lead to a lot of churn due to frequent soft offline / online operations. Instead allocate one for each present CPU to avoid this and dramatically simplify the code. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de> Reviewed-by: Jens Axboe <axboe at kernel.dk> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch at intel.com> Cc: linux-block at vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170626102058.10200-3-hch at lst.de Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix.de> Cc: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr at natalenko.name> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault at gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> :040000 040000 a61cb023014a7b7a6b9f24ea04fe8ab22299e706 059ba6dc3290c74e0468937348e580cd53f963e7 M block :040000 040000 432e719d7e738ffcddfb8fc964544d3b3e0a68f7 f4572aa21b249a851a1b604c148eea109e93b30d M include adding Christoph FWIW, your patch triggers the following on 4.14 when doing a cpu hotplug (adding a CPU) and then accessing a virtio-blk device. 747.652408] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 747.652410] WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xd4/0x100 [ 747.652410] Modules linked in: dm_multipath [ 747.652412] CPU: 4 PID: 2895 Comm: kworker/4:1H Tainted: G W 4.14.0+ #191 [ 747.652412] Hardware name: IBM 2964 NC9 704 (KVM/Linux) [ 747.652414] Workqueue: kblockd blk_mq_run_work_fn [ 747.652414] task: 0000000060680000 task.stack: 000000005ea30000 [ 747.652415] Krnl PSW : 0704f00180000000 0000000000505864 (__blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xd4/0x100) [ 747.652417] R:0 T:1 IO:1 EX:1 Key:0 M:1 W:0 P:0 AS:3 CC:3 PM:0 RI:0 EA:3 [ 747.652417] Krnl GPRS: 0000000000000010 00000000000000ff 000000005cbec400 0000000000000000 [ 747.652418] 0000000063709120 0000000000000000 0000000063709500 0000000059fa44b0 [ 747.652418] 0000000059fa4480 0000000000000000 000000006370f700 0000000063709100 [ 747.652419] 000000005cbec500 0000000000970948 000000005ea33d80 000000005ea33d48 [ 747.652423] Krnl Code: 0000000000505854: ebaff0a00004 lmg %r10,%r15,160(%r15) 000000000050585a: c0f4ffe690d3 brcl 15,1d7a00 #0000000000505860: a7f40001 brc 15,505862 >0000000000505864: 581003b0 l %r1,944 0000000000505868: c01b001fff00 nilf %r1,2096896 000000000050586e: a784ffdb brc 8,505824 0000000000505872: a7f40001 brc 15,505874 0000000000505876: 9120218f tm 399(%r2),32 [ 747.652435] Call Trace: [ 747.652435] ([<0000000063709600>] 0x63709600) [ 747.652436] [<0000000000187bcc>] process_one_work+0x264/0x4b8 [ 747.652438] [<0000000000187e78>] worker_thread+0x58/0x4f8 [ 747.652439] [<000000000018ee94>] kthread+0x144/0x168 [ 747.652439] [<00000000008f8a62>] kernel_thread_starter+0x6/0xc [ 747.652440] [<00000000008f8a5c>] kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc [ 747.652440] Last Breaking-Event-Address: [ 747.652441] [<0000000000505860>] __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xd0/0x100 [ 747.652442] ---[ end trace 4a001a80379b18ba ]--- [ 747.652450] ------------[ cut here ]------------
Apparently Analagous Threads
- 4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk (also 4.12 stable)
- 4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk
- 4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk
- 4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk (also 4.12 stable)
- 4.14: WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 2895 at block/blk-mq.c:1144 with virtio-blk (also 4.12 stable)