From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932903AbcFCNiW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 3 Jun 2016 09:38:22 -0400
Received: from mail-pf0-f196.google.com ([209.85.192.196]:33176 "EHLO
	mail-pf0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932538AbcFCNiV (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 3 Jun 2016 09:38:21 -0400
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 22:38:13 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-next: Tree for Jun 1] __khugepaged_exit
 rwsem_down_write_failed lockup
Message-ID: <20160603133813.GA578@swordfish>
References: <20160601131122.7dbb0a65@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20160602014835.GA635@swordfish>
 <20160602092113.GH1995@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20160603071551.GA453@swordfish>
 <20160603072536.GB20676@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20160603084347.GA502@swordfish>
 <20160603095549.GD20676@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20160603100505.GE20676@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160603100505.GE20676@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (06/03/16 12:05), Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > RIP collect_mm_slot() + 0x42/0x84
> > > 	khugepaged
> > 
> > So is this really collect_mm_slot called directly from khugepaged or is
> > some inlining going on there?

inlining I suppose.

> > > 	prepare_to_wait_event
> > > 	maybe_pmd_mkwrite
> > > 	kthread
> > > 	_raw_sin_unlock_irq
> > > 	ret_from_fork
> > > 	kthread_create_on_node
> > > 
> > > collect_mm_slot() + 0x42/0x84 is
> > 
> > I guess that the problem is that I have missed that __khugepaged_exit
> > doesn't clear the cached khugepaged_scan.mm_slot. Does the following on
> > top fixes that?
> 
> That wouldn't be sufficient after a closer look. We need to do the same
> from khugepaged_scan_mm_slot when atomic_inc_not_zero fails. So I guess
> it would be better to stick it into collect_mm_slot.

Michal, I'll try to test during the weekend (away from the affected box
now), but in the worst case it can as late as next Thursday (gonna travel
next week).

	-ss