From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5102C433E0 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 22:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 480442065F for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 22:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="r4GBeTT3" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 480442065F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9E43D6B0002; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:10:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 997176B0003; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:10:01 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 882AB6B0005; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:10:01 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0054.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.54]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1936B0002 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:10:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071431EE6 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 22:10:01 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77081620602.15.crush17_271096f26f5c Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8F071814B0C8 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 22:10:00 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: crush17_271096f26f5c X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 7580 Received: from mail-qv1-f68.google.com (mail-qv1-f68.google.com [209.85.219.68]) by imf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 22:10:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qv1-f68.google.com with SMTP id x6so784202qvr.8 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:10:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=i3uC59zrTYqrU7WK2MYwBH2tqz/HMoZey93tc8rjRr4=; b=r4GBeTT3czQZ0SGW+2ZGZiDXe9vbLdpYoiIWJ8k8Eoyl8ct25CwlsOu7qKfbM1iPTM BRHUKBbHejZfRqojOTgbFQQbCYwq9SnIxU4cnvcBYCNr8JHqnEs+dgh+r+FAuOGEPLsU PPrJV0mGyo+UZnW3UC+qNUaczQGkxvH5fYzNmwNdCV6FKp1k6tScFwjuaokAtZxxiuag RDS8+Vn99zm+BT7vs0NPsoNn8ba9/7qgJVl3kFqlMR6R0B+vW9VrR7TxIakTcpbOk76d r4x/l+19n3M3/4yeFccrPXXl3GF+fZBosnNZSehIAcUROVNKRKronFd3e6iW4xiW6Ew3 DBqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=i3uC59zrTYqrU7WK2MYwBH2tqz/HMoZey93tc8rjRr4=; b=Zn/l1FWQVTDpw8x65XeTuJEoWxrjOdINSoObfZlYctXn+a+TGl+YySVt/1S6zyXjSx 9kOnZEiFQR10NMgQUsuTHfDnMkbuBKFfSwmbvAEuIuzc1dOTldIjOakEOGlHrLwzvVBI uo7tW/8vheIkE5T29R3kvno4yQ70ZcSkYzKAUd7CxgArnW/fBoPgudRHDnWo4AvTYq/9 1o6r+ohtJ3ELDH++TKHZfL8YEB5pQ0nTyj4N9q9GIbBqQ2O3cMZQvomg+cr659jgYrgV 5f4uDZGm7uxaPgc6zxVjby4HnlxjZ4EsBETY8aN/LGYJV5oud6uqgYxVxR4OYEJOmqlb AoNA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531/F2qYxAWLgFbVagp9VHmN8U1GiLEiVF7YRKbqnYhbhm7qlqZs pGL4F/LIfjN7To2cj6pIqtVyAA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYmQeObi9pYiaTdzrWgeSkB4PjQ9wbXVysW/OJOKebzfOfApfWmxTKy0rUEWgNxhtrIoE2aw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:b88:: with SMTP id fe8mr19676729qvb.244.1595801399318; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:09:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eggly.attlocal.net (172-10-233-147.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [172.10.233.147]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k5sm15419169qke.18.2020.07.26.15.09.57 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:09:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@eggly.anvils To: Linus Torvalds cc: Hugh Dickins , Oleg Nesterov , Michal Hocko , Linux-MM , LKML , Andrew Morton , Tim Chen , Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: silence soft lockups from unlock_page In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20200723124749.GA7428@redhat.com> <20200724152424.GC17209@redhat.com> <20200725101445.GB3870@redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B8F071814B0C8 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Sun, 26 Jul 2020, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 1:30 PM Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > I've deduced nothing useful from the logs, will have to leave that > > to others here with more experience of them. But my assumption now > > is that you have successfully removed one bottleneck, so the tests > > get somewhat further and now stick in the next bottleneck, whatever > > that may be. Which shows up as "failure", where the unlock_page() > > wake_up_page_bit() bottleneck had allowed the tests to proceed in > > a more serially sedate way. > > Well, that's the very optimistic reading. > > As the optimistic and happy person I am (hah!) I'm going to agree with > you, and plan on just merging that patch early in the next merge > window. It may fix a real bug in the current trere, but it's much too > late to apply right now, particularly with your somewhat ambiguous > results. Absolutely: it should be good to see it in v5.9, but much too late for a patch like this in v5.8. > > Oleg's theoretical race has probably never been seen, and while the > watchdog triggering is clearly a real bug, it's also extreme enough > not to really be a strong argument for merging this out-of-window.. > > > The xhci handle_cmd_completion list_del bugs (on an older version > > of the driver): weird, nothing to do with page wakeups, I'll just > > have to assume that it's some driver bug exposed by the greater > > stress allowed down, and let driver people investigate (if it > > still manifests) when we take in your improvements. > > Do you have the bug-report, just to google against anybody else > reporting something simialr> Okay, just on that basis, with some reluctance an edited extract: certainly not asking you or anyone on the list to investigate further. [35196.140502] kernel BUG at lib/list_debug.c:53! [35196.141448] RIP: 0010:__list_del_entry_valid+0x8e/0xb0 [35196.141534] Call Trace: [35196.141538] [35196.141557] [] handle_cmd_completion+0x7d4/0x14f0 [xhci_hcd] [35196.141578] [] xhci_irq+0x242/0x1ea0 [xhci_hcd] [35196.141608] [] xhci_msi_irq+0x11/0x20 [xhci_hcd] [35196.141622] [] __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x48/0x2c0 [35196.141636] [] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x32/0x80 [35196.141651] [] handle_irq_event+0x4a/0x80 [35196.141680] [] handle_edge_irq+0xd8/0x1b0 [35196.141697] [] handle_irq+0x2b/0x50 [35196.141712] [] do_IRQ+0xb6/0x1c0 [35196.141725] [] common_interrupt+0x90/0x90 [35196.141732] > > > One nice thing from the comparison runs without your patches: > > watchdog panic did crash one of those with exactly the unlock_page() > > wake_up_page_bit() softlockup symptom we've been fighting, that did > > not appear with your patches. So although the sample size is much > > too small to justify a conclusion, it does tend towards confirming > > your changes. > > You win some, you lose some. But yes, I'll take that as a tentative > success and that the approach is valid. Great, yes, tentative success: and we have three months in which to change our minds if any real trouble surfaces; and I wouldn't call anything I've seen (since that very first version) *real* trouble. > > Thanks, > > Linus