From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [4.15-rc9] fs_reclaim lockdep trace
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 14:55:28 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8f1c776d-b791-e0b9-1e5c-62b03dcd1d74@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7771dd55-2655-d3a9-80ee-24c9ada7dbbe@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Dave, would you try below patch?
>From cae2cbf389ae3cdef1b492622722b4aeb07eb284 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 14:17:14 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] lockdep: Fix fs_reclaim warning.
Dave Jones reported fs_reclaim lockdep warnings.
============================================
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
4.15.0-rc9-backup-debug+ #1 Not tainted
--------------------------------------------
sshd/24800 is trying to acquire lock:
(fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: [<0000000084f438c2>] fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x5/0x30
but task is already holding lock:
(fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: [<0000000084f438c2>] fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x5/0x30
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(fs_reclaim);
lock(fs_reclaim);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
2 locks held by sshd/24800:
#0: (sk_lock-AF_INET6){+.+.}, at: [<000000001a069652>] tcp_sendmsg+0x19/0x40
#1: (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: [<0000000084f438c2>] fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x5/0x30
stack backtrace:
CPU: 3 PID: 24800 Comm: sshd Not tainted 4.15.0-rc9-backup-debug+ #1
Call Trace:
dump_stack+0xbc/0x13f
__lock_acquire+0xa09/0x2040
lock_acquire+0x12e/0x350
fs_reclaim_acquire.part.102+0x29/0x30
kmem_cache_alloc+0x3d/0x2c0
alloc_extent_state+0xa7/0x410
__clear_extent_bit+0x3ea/0x570
try_release_extent_mapping+0x21a/0x260
__btrfs_releasepage+0xb0/0x1c0
btrfs_releasepage+0x161/0x170
try_to_release_page+0x162/0x1c0
shrink_page_list+0x1d5a/0x2fb0
shrink_inactive_list+0x451/0x940
shrink_node_memcg.constprop.88+0x4c9/0x5e0
shrink_node+0x12d/0x260
try_to_free_pages+0x418/0xaf0
__alloc_pages_slowpath+0x976/0x1790
__alloc_pages_nodemask+0x52c/0x5c0
new_slab+0x374/0x3f0
___slab_alloc.constprop.81+0x47e/0x5a0
__slab_alloc.constprop.80+0x32/0x60
__kmalloc_track_caller+0x267/0x310
__kmalloc_reserve.isra.40+0x29/0x80
__alloc_skb+0xee/0x390
sk_stream_alloc_skb+0xb8/0x340
tcp_sendmsg_locked+0x8e6/0x1d30
tcp_sendmsg+0x27/0x40
inet_sendmsg+0xd0/0x310
sock_write_iter+0x17a/0x240
__vfs_write+0x2ab/0x380
vfs_write+0xfb/0x260
SyS_write+0xb6/0x140
do_syscall_64+0x1e5/0xc05
entry_SYSCALL64_slow_path+0x25/0x25
Since no fs locks are held, doing GFP_KERNEL allocation should be safe
as long as there is PF_MEMALLOC safeguard (
/* Avoid recursion of direct reclaim */
if (p->flags & PF_MEMALLOC)
goto nopage;
) which prevents infinite recursion.
This warning seems to be caused by commit d92a8cfcb37ecd13
("locking/lockdep: Rework FS_RECLAIM annotation") which moved the
location of
/* this guy won't enter reclaim */
if ((current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC))
return false;
check added by commit cf40bd16fdad42c0 ("lockdep: annotate reclaim context
(__GFP_NOFS)"). Since __kmalloc_reserve() from __alloc_skb() adds
__GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN to gfp_mask, __need_fs_reclaim() is
failing to return false despite PF_MEMALLOC context (and resulted in
lockdep warning).
Since there was no PF_MEMALLOC safeguard as of cf40bd16fdad42c0, checking
__GFP_NOMEMALLOC might make sense. But since this safeguard was added by
commit 341ce06f69abfafa ("page allocator: calculate the alloc_flags for
allocation only once"), checking __GFP_NOMEMALLOC no longer makes sense.
Thus, let's remove __GFP_NOMEMALLOC check and allow __need_fs_reclaim() to
return false.
Reported-by: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 76c9688..7804b0e 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3583,7 +3583,7 @@ static bool __need_fs_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask)
return false;
/* this guy won't enter reclaim */
- if ((current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC))
+ if (current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC)
return false;
/* We're only interested __GFP_FS allocations for now */
--
1.8.3.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-28 5:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-24 1:36 [4.15-rc9] fs_reclaim lockdep trace Dave Jones
2018-01-27 22:24 ` Dave Jones
2018-01-27 22:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-01-28 1:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-01-28 4:25 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-01-28 5:55 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2018-01-29 2:43 ` Dave Jones
2018-01-29 10:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-01-29 11:47 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-01-29 13:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-01 11:36 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-02-08 11:43 ` [PATCH v2] lockdep: Fix fs_reclaim warning Tetsuo Handa
2018-02-12 12:08 ` Nikolay Borisov
2018-02-12 13:46 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-02-19 11:52 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-02-27 21:50 ` [PATCH v2 (RESEND)] " Tetsuo Handa
2018-03-07 21:44 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-03-07 23:33 ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-08 15:30 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=8f1c776d-b791-e0b9-1e5c-62b03dcd1d74@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).