All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>, "Huang\,
	Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: swap_cluster_info lockdep splat
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 15:32:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <874lzt6znd.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1702161702490.24224@eggly.anvils> (Hugh Dickins's message of "Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:46:44 -0800")

Hi, Hugh,

Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> writes:

> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017, Tim Chen wrote:
>> 
>> > I do not understand your zest for putting wrappers around every little
>> > thing, making it all harder to follow than it need be.  Here's the patch
>> > I've been running with (but you have a leak somewhere, and I don't have
>> > time to search out and fix it: please try sustained swapping and swapoff).
>> > 
>> 
>> Hugh, trying to duplicate your test case.  So you were doing swapping,
>> then swap off, swap on the swap device and restart swapping?
>
> Repeated pair of make -j20 kernel builds in 700M RAM, 1.5G swap on SSD,
> 8 cpus; one of the builds in tmpfs, other in ext4 on loop on tmpfs file;
> sizes tuned for plenty of swapping but no OOMing (it's an ancient 2.6.24
> kernel I build, modern one needing a lot more space with a lot less in use).
>
> How much of that is relevant I don't know: hopefully none of it, it's
> hard to get the tunings right from scratch.  To answer your specific
> question: yes, I'm not doing concurrent swapoffs in this test showing
> the leak, just waiting for each of the pair of builds to complete,
> then tearing down the trees, doing swapoff followed by swapon, and
> starting a new pair of builds.
>
> Sometimes it's the swapoff that fails with ENOMEM, more often it's a
> fork during build that fails with ENOMEM: after 6 or 7 hours of load
> (but timings show it getting slower leading up to that).  /proc/meminfo
> did not give me an immediate clue, Slab didn't look surprising but
> I may not have studied close enough.
>
> I quilt-bisected it as far as the mm-swap series, good before, bad
> after, but didn't manage to narrow it down further because of hitting
> a presumably different issue inside the series, where swapoff ENOMEMed
> much sooner (after 25 mins one time, during first iteration the next).

I found a memory leak in __read_swap_cache_async() introduced by mm-swap
series, and confirmed it via testing.  Could you verify whether it fixed
your cases?  Thanks a lot for reporting.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>From 4b96423796ab7435104eb2cb4dcf5d525b9e0800 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 10:31:37 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] mm, swap: Fix memory leak in __read_swap_cache_async()

The memory may be leaked in __read_swap_cache_async().  For the cases
as below,

CPU 0						CPU 1
-----						-----

find_get_page() == NULL
__swp_swapcount() != 0
new_page = alloc_page_vma()
radix_tree_maybe_preload()
						swap in swap slot
swapcache_prepare() == -EEXIST
cond_resched()
						reclaim the swap slot
find_get_page() == NULL
__swp_swapcount() == 0
return NULL				<- new_page leaked here !!!

The memory leak has been confirmed via checking the value of new_page
when returning inside the loop in __read_swap_cache_async().

This is fixed via replacing return with break inside of loop in
__read_swap_cache_async(), so that there is opportunity for the
new_page to be checked and freed.

Reported-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
---
 mm/swap_state.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/swap_state.c b/mm/swap_state.c
index 2126e9ba23b2..473b71e052a8 100644
--- a/mm/swap_state.c
+++ b/mm/swap_state.c
@@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ struct page *__read_swap_cache_async(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
 		 * else swap_off will be aborted if we return NULL.
 		 */
 		if (!__swp_swapcount(entry) && swap_slot_cache_enabled)
-			return NULL;
+			break;
 
 		/*
 		 * Get a new page to read into from swap.
-- 
2.11.0

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: swap_cluster_info lockdep splat
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 15:32:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <874lzt6znd.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1702161702490.24224@eggly.anvils> (Hugh Dickins's message of "Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:46:44 -0800")

Hi, Hugh,

Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> writes:

> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017, Tim Chen wrote:
>> 
>> > I do not understand your zest for putting wrappers around every little
>> > thing, making it all harder to follow than it need be.A  Here's the patch
>> > I've been running with (but you have a leak somewhere, and I don't have
>> > time to search out and fix it: please try sustained swapping and swapoff).
>> > 
>> 
>> Hugh, trying to duplicate your test case. A So you were doing swapping,
>> then swap off, swap on the swap device and restart swapping?
>
> Repeated pair of make -j20 kernel builds in 700M RAM, 1.5G swap on SSD,
> 8 cpus; one of the builds in tmpfs, other in ext4 on loop on tmpfs file;
> sizes tuned for plenty of swapping but no OOMing (it's an ancient 2.6.24
> kernel I build, modern one needing a lot more space with a lot less in use).
>
> How much of that is relevant I don't know: hopefully none of it, it's
> hard to get the tunings right from scratch.  To answer your specific
> question: yes, I'm not doing concurrent swapoffs in this test showing
> the leak, just waiting for each of the pair of builds to complete,
> then tearing down the trees, doing swapoff followed by swapon, and
> starting a new pair of builds.
>
> Sometimes it's the swapoff that fails with ENOMEM, more often it's a
> fork during build that fails with ENOMEM: after 6 or 7 hours of load
> (but timings show it getting slower leading up to that).  /proc/meminfo
> did not give me an immediate clue, Slab didn't look surprising but
> I may not have studied close enough.
>
> I quilt-bisected it as far as the mm-swap series, good before, bad
> after, but didn't manage to narrow it down further because of hitting
> a presumably different issue inside the series, where swapoff ENOMEMed
> much sooner (after 25 mins one time, during first iteration the next).

I found a memory leak in __read_swap_cache_async() introduced by mm-swap
series, and confirmed it via testing.  Could you verify whether it fixed
your cases?  Thanks a lot for reporting.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

------------------------------------------------------------------------->

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-02-17  7:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-16  5:22 Minchan Kim
2017-02-16  5:22 ` Minchan Kim
2017-02-16  7:13 ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-16  7:13   ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-16  8:44 ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-16  8:44   ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-16 19:00   ` Hugh Dickins
2017-02-16 19:00     ` Hugh Dickins
2017-02-16 19:34     ` Tim Chen
2017-02-16 19:34       ` Tim Chen
2017-02-17  1:46       ` Hugh Dickins
2017-02-17  2:07         ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-17  2:07           ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-17  2:37           ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-17  2:37             ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-17  7:32         ` Huang, Ying [this message]
2017-02-17  7:32           ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-17 18:42           ` Hugh Dickins
2017-02-17 18:42             ` Hugh Dickins
2017-02-16 23:45     ` Minchan Kim
2017-02-16 23:45       ` Minchan Kim
2017-02-17  0:38     ` Huang, Ying
2017-02-17  0:38       ` Huang, Ying

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=874lzt6znd.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com \
    --to=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --subject='Re: swap_cluster_info lockdep splat' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.