From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
joel@joelfernandes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kfence: Avoid stalling work queue task without allocations
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:20:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201113172050.GJ3249@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201113110604.GA1907210@elver.google.com>
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:06:04PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:00PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 07:12:54PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 09:54AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:14:39PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 01:49PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 at 01:11, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > > > > This assert didn't fire yet, I just get more of the below. I'll keep
> > > > > > > > rerunning, but am not too hopeful...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is bisection a possibility?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've been running a bisection for past ~12h, and am making slow
> > > > > > progress. It might be another 12h, but I think it'll get there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bisection gave me this:
> > > > >
> > > > > | git bisect start
> > > > > | # bad: [c07b306d7fa5680777e2132662d2e6c19fb53579] kfence: Avoid stalling work queue task without allocations
> > > > > | git bisect bad c07b306d7fa5680777e2132662d2e6c19fb53579
> > > > > | # good: [3cea11cd5e3b00d91caf0b4730194039b45c5891] Linux 5.10-rc2
> > > > > | git bisect good 27598e7e73260ed0b2917eb02d4a515ebb578313
> > > > > | # good: [3e5acbea719e66ef3be64fe74c99cc905ca697dc] Merge remote-tracking branch 'wireless-drivers-next/master' into master
> > > > > | git bisect good 3e5acbea719e66ef3be64fe74c99cc905ca697dc
> > > > > | # good: [491a5a9a2fea28353d99621b8abb83b6928b4e36] Merge remote-tracking branch 'sound-asoc/for-next' into master
> > > > > | git bisect good 491a5a9a2fea28353d99621b8abb83b6928b4e36
> > > > > | # bad: [502f8643d6e21c7e370a0b75131130cc51609055] Merge remote-tracking branch 'phy-next/next' into master
> > > > > | git bisect bad 502f8643d6e21c7e370a0b75131130cc51609055
> > > > > | # good: [6693cb1fa5ea7b91ec00f9404776a095713face5] Merge remote-tracking branch 'tip/auto-latest' into master
> > > > > | git bisect good 6693cb1fa5ea7b91ec00f9404776a095713face5
> > > > > | # bad: [b790e3afead9357195b6d1e1b6cd9b3521503ad2] Merge branch 'tglx-pc.2020.10.30a' into HEAD
> > > > > | git bisect bad b790e3afead9357195b6d1e1b6cd9b3521503ad2
> > > > > | # bad: [765b512bb3d639bfad7dd43c288ee085236c7267] Merge branches 'cpuinfo.2020.11.06a', 'doc.2020.11.06a', 'fixes.2020.11.02a', 'lockdep.2020.11.02a', 'tasks.2020.11.06a' and 'torture.2020.11.06a' into HEAD
> > > > > | git bisect bad 765b512bb3d639bfad7dd43c288ee085236c7267
> > > > > | # good: [01f9e708d9eae6335ae9ff25ab09893c20727a55] tools/rcutorture: Fix BUG parsing of console.log
> > > >
> > > > So torture.2020.11.06a is OK.
> > > >
> > > > > | git bisect good 01f9e708d9eae6335ae9ff25ab09893c20727a55
> > > > > | # good: [1be6ab91e2db157faedb7f16ab0636a80745a073] srcu: Take early exit on memory-allocation failure
> > > >
> > > > As is fixes.2020.11.02a.
> > > >
> > > > > | git bisect good 1be6ab91e2db157faedb7f16ab0636a80745a073
> > > > > | # good: [65e9eb1ccfe56b41a0d8bfec651ea014968413cb] rcu: Prevent RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN() from swallowing the condition
> > > >
> > > > And lockdep.2020.11.02a.
> > > >
> > > > > | git bisect good 65e9eb1ccfe56b41a0d8bfec651ea014968413cb
> > > > > | # good: [c386e29d43728778ddd642fa73cc582bee684171] docs/rcu: Update the call_rcu() API
> > > >
> > > > And doc.2020.11.06a.
> > > >
> > > > > | git bisect good c386e29d43728778ddd642fa73cc582bee684171
> > > > > | # good: [27c0f1448389baf7f309b69e62d4b531c9395e88] rcutorture: Make grace-period kthread report match RCU flavor being tested
> > > >
> > > > And the first three commits of tasks.2020.11.06a.
> > > >
> > > > > | git bisect good 27c0f1448389baf7f309b69e62d4b531c9395e88
> > > > > | # good: [3fcd6a230fa7d03bffcb831a81b40435c146c12b] x86/cpu: Avoid cpuinfo-induced IPIing of idle CPUs
> > > >
> > > > And cpuinfo.2020.11.06a.
> > > >
> > > > > | git bisect good 3fcd6a230fa7d03bffcb831a81b40435c146c12b
> > > > > | # good: [75dc2da5ecd65bdcbfc4d59b9d9b7342c61fe374] rcu-tasks: Make the units of ->init_fract be jiffies
> > > >
> > > > And the remaining commit of tasks.2020.11.06a.
> > > >
> > > > > | git bisect good 75dc2da5ecd65bdcbfc4d59b9d9b7342c61fe374
> > > > > | # first bad commit: [765b512bb3d639bfad7dd43c288ee085236c7267] Merge branches 'cpuinfo.2020.11.06a', 'doc.2020.11.06a', 'fixes.2020.11.02a', 'lockdep.2020.11.02a', 'tasks.2020.11.06a' and 'torture.2020.11.06a' into HEAD
> > > > >
> > > > > This doesn't look very satisfying, given it's the merge commit. :-/
> > > >
> > > > So each individual branch is just fine, but the merge of them is not. Fun.
> > > >
> > > > These have been passing quite a bit of rcutorture over here, including
> > > > preemptible kernels running !SMP, but admittedly on x86 rather than ARMv8.
> > >
> > > Note that this is ARMv8 on QEMU on an x86 host i.e. emulated. And it's
> > > really slow as a result. Together with a bunch of debug tools including
> > > lockdep.
> >
> > Then I don't envy you the bisection process! ;-)
> >
> > > > One approach would be to binary-search the combinations of merges.
> > > > Except that there are six of them, so there are 64 combinations, of
> > > > which you have tested only 8 thus far (none, one each, and all).
> > > >
> > > > But are you sure that the bisection points labeled "good" really are good?
> > > > For example, what is the distribution of first failure times in the
> > > > points labeled "bad" vs. the runtime used to make a "good" determination?
> > > > Alternatively, just try a longer run on each of the commits feeding into
> > > > the merge point.
> > >
> > > Yeah, I'm having doubts, and this might be even more non-deterministic
> > > that I thought and some 'good' could maybe be 'bad' if I had re-run
> > > them? I don't know. One thing I can try is to make sure I run it more
> > > than once, but I'm definitely not doing that manually, so let me try and
> > > script something so I don't have to hand-hold the bisection overnight.
> > > :-)
> >
> > I know that feeling. A similar experience motivated me to upgrade my
> > tooling, with more upgrades in the queue.
>
> [.....]
>
> > > > > | [ 841.143527] arch_local_irq_restore+0x4/0x8
> > > >
> > > > So we are just now restoring interrupts, hence our getting the
> > > > interrupt at this point..
> > > >
> > > > > | [ 841.147612] trace_preempt_on+0xf4/0x190
> > > >
> > > > From within the trace code, which is apparently recording the fact
> > > > that preemption is being enabled.
> > > >
> > > > > | [ 841.151656] preempt_schedule_common+0x12c/0x1b0
> > > > > | [ 841.155869] preempt_schedule.part.88+0x20/0x28
> > > > > | [ 841.160036] preempt_schedule+0x20/0x28
> > > >
> > > > I was not aware that releasing a raw spinlock could result in a direct
> > > > call to preempt_schedule().
> > > >
> > > > > | [ 841.164051] _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x80/0x90
> > > > > | [ 841.168139] rcu_gp_kthread+0xe5c/0x19a8
> > > >
> > > > So the RCU grace-period kthread has spent many seconds attempting to
> > > > release a lock? Am I reading this correctly? Mark Rutland, am I missing
> > > > something here?
> >
> > And yes, this is the RCU grace-period kthread releasing a lock.
> >
> > I have no idea why that would take so long. It is acting like a
> > self-deadlock or similar hang, except that in that case, lockdep should
> > have complained before the RCU CPU stall warning rather than after.
> >
> > The only thing I can suggest is sprinkling lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled()
> > calls hither and yon. All of the code that lockdep is complaining about
> > runs in the context of the scheduling-clock interrupt, so interrupts
> > had jolly well be disabled! ;-)
> >
> > Rerunning some of the allegedly good bisects might be more productive.
>
> Oof, so I reran bisection, and this time confirming 3x each good run.
> This is what I get:
>
> | git bisect start
> | # bad: [c07b306d7fa5680777e2132662d2e6c19fb53579] kfence: Avoid stalling work queue task without allocations
> | git bisect bad c07b306d7fa5680777e2132662d2e6c19fb53579
> | # good: [3cea11cd5e3b00d91caf0b4730194039b45c5891] Linux 5.10-rc2
> | git bisect good 27598e7e73260ed0b2917eb02d4a515ebb578313
> | # good: [3e5acbea719e66ef3be64fe74c99cc905ca697dc] Merge remote-tracking branch 'wireless-drivers-next/master' into master
> | git bisect good 3e5acbea719e66ef3be64fe74c99cc905ca697dc
> | # good: [491a5a9a2fea28353d99621b8abb83b6928b4e36] Merge remote-tracking branch 'sound-asoc/for-next' into master
> | git bisect good 491a5a9a2fea28353d99621b8abb83b6928b4e36
> | # bad: [502f8643d6e21c7e370a0b75131130cc51609055] Merge remote-tracking branch 'phy-next/next' into master
> | git bisect bad 502f8643d6e21c7e370a0b75131130cc51609055
> | # good: [6693cb1fa5ea7b91ec00f9404776a095713face5] Merge remote-tracking branch 'tip/auto-latest' into master
> | git bisect good 6693cb1fa5ea7b91ec00f9404776a095713face5
> | # good: [b790e3afead9357195b6d1e1b6cd9b3521503ad2] Merge branch 'tglx-pc.2020.10.30a' into HEAD
> | git bisect good b790e3afead9357195b6d1e1b6cd9b3521503ad2
> | # bad: [7bd5bb161657717d576798f62b0e8d5b44653139] Merge remote-tracking branch 'drivers-x86/for-next' into master
> | git bisect bad 7bd5bb161657717d576798f62b0e8d5b44653139
> | # bad: [e71eb4c4d42bcf36a3a7ede30fd320d47b3c8cb8] Merge remote-tracking branch 'xen-tip/linux-next' into master
> | git bisect bad e71eb4c4d42bcf36a3a7ede30fd320d47b3c8cb8
> | # bad: [c0a41bf9dbc751692c8cb1a44bfd48e70e8bef7f] docs: Remove redundant "``" from Requirements.rst
> | git bisect bad c0a41bf9dbc751692c8cb1a44bfd48e70e8bef7f
> | # bad: [c293fb8f7de6c2fce11cb01a0218d668df326bcd] torture: Make --kcsan specify lockdep
> | git bisect bad c293fb8f7de6c2fce11cb01a0218d668df326bcd
> | # good: [5068ab7dcb6a526a401054ebe0d416f979efb3e1] rcutorture: Add testing for RCU's global memory ordering
> | git bisect good 5068ab7dcb6a526a401054ebe0d416f979efb3e1
> | # good: [bea68a13bbbdc575a2c868dabd7b454c2eddc618] rcu/segcblist: Add additional comments to explain smp_mb()
> | git bisect good bea68a13bbbdc575a2c868dabd7b454c2eddc618
> | # first bad commit: [c293fb8f7de6c2fce11cb01a0218d668df326bcd] torture: Make --kcsan specify lockdep
>
> Which clearly is ridiculous! So my guess is this probably had existed
> before, but something in -next is making it more visible.
>
> Short of giving up, I can try your suggestion of sprinkling
> lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled() everywhere, or if you have a patch to
> apply that would give some other debug output you wanted I can run that
> too.
I don't have a patch, but if you are still seeing lots of workqueue
lockups before the RCU CPU stall warning, I again suggest adding the
backtrace as called out in my earlier email. The idea here is to see
what is causing these lockups.
I can send a formal patch for this if you wish, but today is crazy,
so I cannot promise it before this evening, Pacific Time.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-13 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-10 13:53 [PATCH] kfence: Avoid stalling work queue task without allocations Marco Elver
2020-11-10 14:25 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2020-11-10 14:53 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-10 23:23 ` Anders Roxell
2020-11-11 8:29 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-11 13:38 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-11 18:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-11 18:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-11 18:34 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-11 19:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-11 20:21 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-12 0:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-12 12:49 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-12 16:14 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-12 17:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-12 18:12 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-12 20:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-13 11:06 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-13 17:20 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2020-11-13 17:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-17 10:52 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-17 18:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-18 22:56 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-18 23:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-19 12:53 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-19 15:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-19 17:02 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-19 18:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-19 19:38 ` linux-next: stall warnings and deadlock on Arm64 (was: [PATCH] kfence: Avoid stalling...) Marco Elver
2020-11-19 21:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-19 22:53 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-20 10:30 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-20 14:03 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-23 19:32 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-24 14:03 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-24 15:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-24 19:43 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-24 20:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-24 19:30 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-25 9:45 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-25 10:28 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-20 14:19 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-20 14:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-20 15:22 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-20 17:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-20 18:02 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-20 18:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-20 15:26 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-20 18:17 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-20 18:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-20 19:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-20 19:22 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-20 19:27 ` [PATCH] kfence: Avoid stalling work queue task without allocations Steven Rostedt
2020-11-23 15:27 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-23 16:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-23 16:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-23 18:53 ` Marco Elver
2020-11-23 18:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-11-24 2:59 ` Boqun Feng
2020-11-24 3:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-11 18:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-11-11 15:01 ` Anders Roxell
2020-11-11 15:22 ` Marco Elver
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=20201113172050.GJ3249@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anders.roxell@linaro.org \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).