Re: [dm-devel] Re: dm: bounce_pfn limit added
- From: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:00:16 -0500 (EST)
Hi,
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:36:01 +0100, Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Vasily Averin wrote:
Alasdair G Kergon wrote:We actually had a similar issue with some raid drivers (gdth iirc), and Neil Brown
So currently we treat bounce_pfn as a property that does not need to be
propagated through the stack.
But is that the right approach?
- Is there a blk_queue_bounce() missing either from dm or elsewhere?
(And BTW can the bio_alloc() that lurks within lead to deadlock?)
Firstly, what's going wrong?
- What is the dm table you are using? (output of 'dmsetup table')
- Which dm targets and with how many underlying devices?
- Which underlying driver?
- Is this direct I/O to the block device from userspace, or via some
filesystem or what?
On my testnode I have 6 Gb memory (1Gb normal zone for i386 kernels),
i2o hardware and lvm over i2o.
[root@ts10 ~]# dmsetup table
vzvg-vz: 0 10289152 linear 80:5 384
vzvg-vzt: 0 263127040 linear 80:5 10289536
[root@ts10 ~]# cat /proc/partitions
major minor #blocks name
80 0 143374336 i2o/hda
80 1 514048 i2o/hda1
80 2 4096575 i2o/hda2
80 3 2040255 i2o/hda3
80 4 1 i2o/hda4
80 5 136721151 i2o/hda5
253 0 5144576 dm-0
253 1 131563520 dm-1
Diotest from LTP test suite with ~1Mb buffer size and files on dm-over-i2o
paritions corrupts i2o_iop0_msg_inpool slab.
I2o on this node is able to handle only requests with up to 38 segments. Device
mapper correctly creates such requests and as you know it uses
max_pfn=BLK_BOUNCE_ANY. When this request translates to underlying device, it
clones bio and cleans BIO_SEG_VALID flag.
In this way underlying device calls blk_recalc_rq_segments() to recount number
of segments. However blk_recalc_rq_segments uses bounce_pfn=BLK_BOUNCE_HIGH
taken from underlying device. As result number of segments become over than
max_hw_segments limit.
Unfortunately there is not any checks and when i2o driver handles this incorrect
request it fills the memory out of i2o_iop0_msg_inpool slab.
did a similar patch for it. These were his comments on it:
So I guess we should take this.
dm handles max_hw_segments by using an 'io_restrictions' structure
that keeps the most restrictive values from all component devices.
So it should not allow more than max_hw_segments.
However I just notices that it does not preserve bounce_pfn as a restriction.
So when the request gets down to the driver, it may be split up in to more
segments than was expected up at the dm level.
How about the case that other dm device is stacked on the dm device?
(e.g. dm-linear over dm-multipath over i2o with bounce_pfn=64GB, and
the multipath table is changed to i2o with bounce_pfn=1GB.)
With this example, the patch propagates the restriction of i2o
to dm-multipath but not to dm-linear.
So I guess the same problem happens.
Although it may sound like a corner case, such situation could occur
with pvmove of LVM2, for example.
I think we should take care of it too so that system won't be destroyed.
Rejecting to load such table will at least prevent the problem.
Thanks,
Kiyoshi Ueda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: dm: bounce_pfn limit added
- From: Alasdair G Kergon
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: dm: bounce_pfn limit added
- From: Vasily Averin
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: dm: bounce_pfn limit added
- From: Hannes Reinecke
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: dm: bounce_pfn limit added
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] mtrr use type bool
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice
- Previous by thread: Re: [dm-devel] Re: dm: bounce_pfn limit added
- Next by thread: i2o: CONFIG_DEBUG_SG compilation fixed
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|