* Re: kswapd using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible code
@ 2014-03-18 21:22 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2014-03-18 21:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sergey Senozhatsky
Cc: Alexander Viro, Mel Gorman, Michal Hocko, Rik van Riel,
Johannes Weiner, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, linux-kernel,
Christoph Lameter
On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 21:53:30 +0300 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello gentlemen,
>
> Commit 589a606f9539663f162e4a110d117527833b58a4 ("percpu: add preemption
> checks to __this_cpu ops") added preempt check to used in __count_vm_events()
> __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd warning:
>
> BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
> [<ffffffff810e3951>] super_cache_scan+0xe3/0x143
> [<ffffffff810b1301>] shrink_slab_node+0x103/0x16f
> [<ffffffff810b19fd>] shrink_slab+0x75/0xe4
> [<ffffffff810b3f3d>] balance_pgdat+0x2fa/0x47f
> [<ffffffff810b4395>] kswapd+0x2d3/0x2fd
> [<ffffffff81068049>] ? __wake_up_sync+0xd/0xd
> [<ffffffff810b40c2>] ? balance_pgdat+0x47f/0x47f
> [<ffffffff81051e75>] kthread+0xd6/0xde
> [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> [<ffffffff813be5bc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
>
>
> list_lru_walk_node() seems to be the only place where __count_vm_events()
> called with preemption enabled. remaining __count_vm_events() and
> __count_vm_event() calls are done with preemption disabled (unless I
> overlooked something).
Christoph caught one. How does this look?
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: fs/inode.c:inode_lru_isolate(): use atomic count_vm_events()
"percpu: add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops" added preempt check to
used in __count_vm_events() __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd
warning:
BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
[<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
[<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
[<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
[<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
[<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
[<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
Switch from __count_vm_events() to the preempt-safe count_vm_events().
Reported-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
fs/inode.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff -puN fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events fs/inode.c
--- a/fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events
+++ a/fs/inode.c
@@ -722,9 +722,9 @@ inode_lru_isolate(struct list_head *item
unsigned long reap;
reap = invalidate_mapping_pages(&inode->i_data, 0, -1);
if (current_is_kswapd())
- __count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
+ count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
else
- __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
+ count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
if (current->reclaim_state)
current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab += reap;
}
_
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: kswapd using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible code
2014-03-18 21:22 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2014-03-19 6:20 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Senozhatsky @ 2014-03-19 6:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Alexander Viro, Mel Gorman, Michal Hocko, Rik van Riel,
Johannes Weiner, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, linux-kernel,
Christoph Lameter
On (03/18/14 14:22), Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 21:53:30 +0300 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello gentlemen,
> >
> > Commit 589a606f9539663f162e4a110d117527833b58a4 ("percpu: add preemption
> > checks to __this_cpu ops") added preempt check to used in __count_vm_events()
> > __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd warning:
> >
> > BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> > caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> > [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> > [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> > [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> > [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> > [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
> > [<ffffffff810e3951>] super_cache_scan+0xe3/0x143
> > [<ffffffff810b1301>] shrink_slab_node+0x103/0x16f
> > [<ffffffff810b19fd>] shrink_slab+0x75/0xe4
> > [<ffffffff810b3f3d>] balance_pgdat+0x2fa/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff810b4395>] kswapd+0x2d3/0x2fd
> > [<ffffffff81068049>] ? __wake_up_sync+0xd/0xd
> > [<ffffffff810b40c2>] ? balance_pgdat+0x47f/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff81051e75>] kthread+0xd6/0xde
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> > [<ffffffff813be5bc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> >
> >
> > list_lru_walk_node() seems to be the only place where __count_vm_events()
> > called with preemption enabled. remaining __count_vm_events() and
> > __count_vm_event() calls are done with preemption disabled (unless I
> > overlooked something).
>
> Christoph caught one. How does this look?
>
Thank you.
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
-ss
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Subject: fs/inode.c:inode_lru_isolate(): use atomic count_vm_events()
>
> "percpu: add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops" added preempt check to
> used in __count_vm_events() __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd
> warning:
>
> BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
>
> Switch from __count_vm_events() to the preempt-safe count_vm_events().
>
> Reported-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> fs/inode.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events fs/inode.c
> --- a/fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events
> +++ a/fs/inode.c
> @@ -722,9 +722,9 @@ inode_lru_isolate(struct list_head *item
> unsigned long reap;
> reap = invalidate_mapping_pages(&inode->i_data, 0, -1);
> if (current_is_kswapd())
> - __count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> else
> - __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> if (current->reclaim_state)
> current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab += reap;
> }
> _
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: kswapd using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible code
@ 2014-03-19 6:20 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Senozhatsky @ 2014-03-19 6:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Alexander Viro, Mel Gorman, Michal Hocko, Rik van Riel,
Johannes Weiner, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, linux-kernel,
Christoph Lameter
On (03/18/14 14:22), Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 21:53:30 +0300 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello gentlemen,
> >
> > Commit 589a606f9539663f162e4a110d117527833b58a4 ("percpu: add preemption
> > checks to __this_cpu ops") added preempt check to used in __count_vm_events()
> > __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd warning:
> >
> > BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> > caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> > [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> > [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> > [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> > [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> > [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
> > [<ffffffff810e3951>] super_cache_scan+0xe3/0x143
> > [<ffffffff810b1301>] shrink_slab_node+0x103/0x16f
> > [<ffffffff810b19fd>] shrink_slab+0x75/0xe4
> > [<ffffffff810b3f3d>] balance_pgdat+0x2fa/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff810b4395>] kswapd+0x2d3/0x2fd
> > [<ffffffff81068049>] ? __wake_up_sync+0xd/0xd
> > [<ffffffff810b40c2>] ? balance_pgdat+0x47f/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff81051e75>] kthread+0xd6/0xde
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> > [<ffffffff813be5bc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> >
> >
> > list_lru_walk_node() seems to be the only place where __count_vm_events()
> > called with preemption enabled. remaining __count_vm_events() and
> > __count_vm_event() calls are done with preemption disabled (unless I
> > overlooked something).
>
> Christoph caught one. How does this look?
>
Thank you.
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
-ss
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Subject: fs/inode.c:inode_lru_isolate(): use atomic count_vm_events()
>
> "percpu: add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops" added preempt check to
> used in __count_vm_events() __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd
> warning:
>
> BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
>
> Switch from __count_vm_events() to the preempt-safe count_vm_events().
>
> Reported-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> fs/inode.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events fs/inode.c
> --- a/fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events
> +++ a/fs/inode.c
> @@ -722,9 +722,9 @@ inode_lru_isolate(struct list_head *item
> unsigned long reap;
> reap = invalidate_mapping_pages(&inode->i_data, 0, -1);
> if (current_is_kswapd())
> - __count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> else
> - __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> if (current->reclaim_state)
> current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab += reap;
> }
> _
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: kswapd using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible code
2014-03-18 21:22 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2014-03-20 1:01 ` Dave Chinner
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Chinner @ 2014-03-20 1:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky, Alexander Viro, Mel Gorman, Michal Hocko,
Rik van Riel, Johannes Weiner, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Christoph Lameter
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 02:22:16PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 21:53:30 +0300 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello gentlemen,
> >
> > Commit 589a606f9539663f162e4a110d117527833b58a4 ("percpu: add preemption
> > checks to __this_cpu ops") added preempt check to used in __count_vm_events()
> > __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd warning:
> >
> > BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> > caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> > [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> > [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> > [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> > [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> > [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
> > [<ffffffff810e3951>] super_cache_scan+0xe3/0x143
> > [<ffffffff810b1301>] shrink_slab_node+0x103/0x16f
> > [<ffffffff810b19fd>] shrink_slab+0x75/0xe4
> > [<ffffffff810b3f3d>] balance_pgdat+0x2fa/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff810b4395>] kswapd+0x2d3/0x2fd
> > [<ffffffff81068049>] ? __wake_up_sync+0xd/0xd
> > [<ffffffff810b40c2>] ? balance_pgdat+0x47f/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff81051e75>] kthread+0xd6/0xde
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> > [<ffffffff813be5bc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> >
> >
> > list_lru_walk_node() seems to be the only place where __count_vm_events()
> > called with preemption enabled. remaining __count_vm_events() and
> > __count_vm_event() calls are done with preemption disabled (unless I
> > overlooked something).
>
> Christoph caught one. How does this look?
>
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Subject: fs/inode.c:inode_lru_isolate(): use atomic count_vm_events()
>
> "percpu: add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops" added preempt check to
> used in __count_vm_events() __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd
> warning:
>
> BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
>
> Switch from __count_vm_events() to the preempt-safe count_vm_events().
>
> Reported-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> fs/inode.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events fs/inode.c
> --- a/fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events
> +++ a/fs/inode.c
> @@ -722,9 +722,9 @@ inode_lru_isolate(struct list_head *item
> unsigned long reap;
> reap = invalidate_mapping_pages(&inode->i_data, 0, -1);
> if (current_is_kswapd())
> - __count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> else
> - __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> if (current->reclaim_state)
> current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab += reap;
> }
Acked-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: kswapd using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible code
@ 2014-03-20 1:01 ` Dave Chinner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Chinner @ 2014-03-20 1:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky, Alexander Viro, Mel Gorman, Michal Hocko,
Rik van Riel, Johannes Weiner, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Christoph Lameter
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 02:22:16PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 21:53:30 +0300 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello gentlemen,
> >
> > Commit 589a606f9539663f162e4a110d117527833b58a4 ("percpu: add preemption
> > checks to __this_cpu ops") added preempt check to used in __count_vm_events()
> > __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd warning:
> >
> > BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> > caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> > [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> > [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> > [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> > [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> > [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> > [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
> > [<ffffffff810e3951>] super_cache_scan+0xe3/0x143
> > [<ffffffff810b1301>] shrink_slab_node+0x103/0x16f
> > [<ffffffff810b19fd>] shrink_slab+0x75/0xe4
> > [<ffffffff810b3f3d>] balance_pgdat+0x2fa/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff810b4395>] kswapd+0x2d3/0x2fd
> > [<ffffffff81068049>] ? __wake_up_sync+0xd/0xd
> > [<ffffffff810b40c2>] ? balance_pgdat+0x47f/0x47f
> > [<ffffffff81051e75>] kthread+0xd6/0xde
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> > [<ffffffff813be5bc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff81051d9f>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x162/0x162
> >
> >
> > list_lru_walk_node() seems to be the only place where __count_vm_events()
> > called with preemption enabled. remaining __count_vm_events() and
> > __count_vm_event() calls are done with preemption disabled (unless I
> > overlooked something).
>
> Christoph caught one. How does this look?
>
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Subject: fs/inode.c:inode_lru_isolate(): use atomic count_vm_events()
>
> "percpu: add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops" added preempt check to
> used in __count_vm_events() __this_cpu ops, causing the following kswapd
> warning:
>
> BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: kswapd0/56
> caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff813b8d4d>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
> [<ffffffff8121366f>] check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xdd
> [<ffffffff812136bb>] __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x2b/0x2d
> [<ffffffff810f622e>] inode_lru_isolate+0xed/0x197
> [<ffffffff810be43c>] list_lru_walk_node+0x7b/0x14c
> [<ffffffff810f6141>] ? iput+0x131/0x131
> [<ffffffff810f681f>] prune_icache_sb+0x35/0x4c
>
> Switch from __count_vm_events() to the preempt-safe count_vm_events().
>
> Reported-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> fs/inode.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events fs/inode.c
> --- a/fs/inode.c~fs-inodec-inode_lru_isolate-use-atomic-count_vm_events
> +++ a/fs/inode.c
> @@ -722,9 +722,9 @@ inode_lru_isolate(struct list_head *item
> unsigned long reap;
> reap = invalidate_mapping_pages(&inode->i_data, 0, -1);
> if (current_is_kswapd())
> - __count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(KSWAPD_INODESTEAL, reap);
> else
> - __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> + count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> if (current->reclaim_state)
> current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab += reap;
> }
Acked-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: kswapd using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible code
2014-03-18 21:22 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2014-03-20 14:04 ` Christoph Lameter
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Lameter @ 2014-03-20 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky, Alexander Viro, Mel Gorman, Michal Hocko,
Rik van Riel, Johannes Weiner, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
linux-kernel
On Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Christoph caught one. How does this look?
The fundamental decision to be made here is if we want the counter
overhead coming on platforms that do not have lockless percpu atomics
and therefore would require an irq on/off sequence for safe counter
increments.
So far we have said that we do allow the counters to be racy for
performance sake. Your patch would remove the races.
If we want to keep the races and the performance than we need to change
__count_vm_events to use raw_cpu_add instead of __this_cpu_add.
Subject: vmstat: Use raw_cpu_ops to avoid false positives on preemption checks
vm counters are allowed to be racy. Use raw_cpu_ops to avoid preemption checks.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Index: linux/include/linux/vmstat.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/linux/vmstat.h 2014-02-10 08:54:02.318697828 -0600
+++ linux/include/linux/vmstat.h 2014-03-20 09:02:05.132852038 -0500
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct vm_event_state, v
static inline void __count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
{
- __this_cpu_inc(vm_event_states.event[item]);
+ raw_cpu_inc(vm_event_states.event[item]);
}
static inline void count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ static inline void count_vm_event(enum v
static inline void __count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
{
- __this_cpu_add(vm_event_states.event[item], delta);
+ raw_cpu_add(vm_event_states.event[item], delta);
}
static inline void count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: kswapd using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible code
@ 2014-03-20 14:04 ` Christoph Lameter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Lameter @ 2014-03-20 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky, Alexander Viro, Mel Gorman, Michal Hocko,
Rik van Riel, Johannes Weiner, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
linux-kernel
On Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Christoph caught one. How does this look?
The fundamental decision to be made here is if we want the counter
overhead coming on platforms that do not have lockless percpu atomics
and therefore would require an irq on/off sequence for safe counter
increments.
So far we have said that we do allow the counters to be racy for
performance sake. Your patch would remove the races.
If we want to keep the races and the performance than we need to change
__count_vm_events to use raw_cpu_add instead of __this_cpu_add.
Subject: vmstat: Use raw_cpu_ops to avoid false positives on preemption checks
vm counters are allowed to be racy. Use raw_cpu_ops to avoid preemption checks.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Index: linux/include/linux/vmstat.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/linux/vmstat.h 2014-02-10 08:54:02.318697828 -0600
+++ linux/include/linux/vmstat.h 2014-03-20 09:02:05.132852038 -0500
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct vm_event_state, v
static inline void __count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
{
- __this_cpu_inc(vm_event_states.event[item]);
+ raw_cpu_inc(vm_event_states.event[item]);
}
static inline void count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ static inline void count_vm_event(enum v
static inline void __count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
{
- __this_cpu_add(vm_event_states.event[item], delta);
+ raw_cpu_add(vm_event_states.event[item], delta);
}
static inline void count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread