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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31FC3C6FD1F for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:54:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230252AbjCVDyj (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2023 23:54:39 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40946 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229595AbjCVDyg (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2023 23:54:36 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61E062DE48; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 20:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D62B661E6A; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:54:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 38414C433D2; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:54:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1679457274; bh=xmqAsw1iMMvmyXs7mPPwRWR1QfDflLyfLWQXrMtKjCw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=JGysqpgGFCSLDd6AefujpMM/k5VMkxbu9iBP4+o/XV0cUo5XgScuFKu7XvaVCff+o 8dzlHZQqoa79ylvPJNiOQniiZK9ZZ/3mdpLieluC5PW5tpkolyzrgXEidaHNl1LG+b U1/m2vNZfftSPfx3TMl0GlnJA5I+6yNGazXUONprrFs3cOrNl0HHmkJvL/tlRuKVOT vX/48SrlXHRhf18mvTUXVXI4ZOj6OvfEFdKKW4i6RXIk1Md8tetC04jJ2Culb12qLj XNhMwpEi6VatuLp84Mr8WkbASb3pzD13LBekrLDpDwV1sU++glOV7DYraENLS36/CJ H5zX/1ec1pg0A== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P72.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B2A51154033A; Tue, 21 Mar 2023 20:54:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 20:54:33 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: "Zhang, Qiang1" Cc: "frederic@kernel.org" , "joel@joelfernandes.org" , "rcu@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] srcu: Fix flush sup work warning in cleanup_srcu_struct() Message-ID: Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <20230321081346.192000-1-qiang1.zhang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 01:15:02AM +0000, Zhang, Qiang1 wrote: > > insmod rcutorture.ko > > rmmod rcutorture.ko > > > > [ 209.437327] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 508 at kernel/workqueue.c:3167 __flush_work+0x50a/0x540 > > [ 209.437346] Modules linked in: rcutorture(-) torture [last unloaded: rcutorture] > > [ 209.437382] CPU: 0 PID: 508 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G W 6.3.0-rc1-yocto-standard+ > > [ 209.437406] RIP: 0010:__flush_work+0x50a/0x540 > > ..... > > [ 209.437758] flush_delayed_work+0x36/0x90 > > [ 209.437776] cleanup_srcu_struct+0x68/0x2e0 > > [ 209.437817] srcu_module_notify+0x71/0x140 > > [ 209.437854] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x9d/0xd0 > > [ 209.437880] __x64_sys_delete_module+0x223/0x2e0 > > [ 209.438046] do_syscall_64+0x43/0x90 > > [ 209.438062] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc > > > > For srcu objects defined with DEFINE_SRCU() or DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU(), > > when compiling and loading as modules, the srcu_module_coming() is invoked, > > allocate memory for srcu structure's->sda and initialize sda structure, > > due to not fully initialize srcu structure's->sup, so at this time the > > sup structure's->delaywork.func is null, if not invoke init_srcu_struct_fields() > > before unloading modules, in srcu_module_going() the __flush_work() find > > work->func is empty, will raise the warning above. > > > > This commit add init_srcu_struct_fields() to initialize srcu structure's->sup, > > in srcu_module_coming(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Zqiang > > > >Good catch, and thank you for testing the in-module case! > > > >One question below... > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > --- > > kernel/rcu/srcutree.c | 11 ++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c > > index 1fb078abbdc9..42d8720e016c 100644 > > --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c > > @@ -1921,7 +1921,8 @@ static int srcu_module_coming(struct module *mod) > > ssp->sda = alloc_percpu(struct srcu_data); > > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!ssp->sda)) > > return -ENOMEM; > > - init_srcu_struct_data(ssp); > > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(init_srcu_struct_fields(ssp, true))) > > + return -ENOMEM; > > > >Wouldn't it be better to simply delete the init_srcu_struct_data()? > > > >Then the first call to check_init_srcu_struct() would take care of > >the initialization, just as for the non-module case. Or am I missing > >something subtle? > > Hi Paul > > Maybe the check_init_srcu_struct() is always not invoked, for example, > In rcutorture.c, here is such a definition DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU(srcu_ctl), > but we use torture_type=rcu to test, there will not be any interface calling > check_init_srcu_struct() to initialize srcu_ctl and set structure's->delaywork.func > is process_srcu(). > when we unload the rcutorture module, invoke cleanup_srcu_struct() > to flush sup structure's->delaywork.func, due to the func pointer is not initialize, > it's null, will trigger warning. > > About kernel/workqueue.c:3167 > > __flush_work > if (WARN_ON(!work->func)) <---------trigger waning > return false; > > > and in init_srcu_struct_fields(ssp, true), wil set srcu_sup->sda_is_static is true > and set srcu_sup-> srcu_gp_seq_needed is zero, after that when we call > check_init_srcu_struct() again, it not be initialized again. Good point! In the non-module statically allocated case there is never a call to cleanup_srcu_struct(). So suppose the code in srcu_module_coming() only did the alloc_percpu(), and then the code in srcu_module_going() only did the the matching free_percpu() instead of the current cleanup_srcu_struct()? Thanx, Paul > Thanks > Zqiang > > > > >It should also be possible to eliminate duplicate code between the > >in-module and non-module statically allocated initialization cases, > >come to think of it. > > > > } > > return 0; > > } > > @@ -1931,9 +1932,13 @@ static void srcu_module_going(struct module *mod) > > { > > int i; > > struct srcu_struct **sspp = mod->srcu_struct_ptrs; > > + struct srcu_struct *ssp; > > > > - for (i = 0; i < mod->num_srcu_structs; i++) > > - cleanup_srcu_struct(*(sspp++)); > > + for (i = 0; i < mod->num_srcu_structs; i++) { > > + ssp = *(sspp++); > > + cleanup_srcu_struct(ssp); > > + free_percpu(ssp->sda); > > + } > > > >And good catch on another memory leak with this one, looks proper > >to me. > > > > } > > > > /* Handle one module, either coming or going. */ > > -- > > 2.25.1 > >