| Message ID | b8ade452-2d6b-0372-32c2-703644032b47@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] mm/hugetlb: Don't put_page in lock of hugetlb_lock | expand |
On Mon 06-05-19 22:06:38, Zhiqiang Liu wrote: > From: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > > spinlock recursion happened when do LTP test: > #!/bin/bash > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > > The dtor returned by get_compound_page_dtor in __put_compound_page > may be the function of free_huge_page which will lock the hugetlb_lock, > so don't put_page in lock of hugetlb_lock. > > BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, hugemmap05/1079 > lock: hugetlb_lock+0x0/0x18, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: hugemmap05/1079, .owner_cpu: 0 > Call trace: > dump_backtrace+0x0/0x198 > show_stack+0x24/0x30 > dump_stack+0xa4/0xcc > spin_dump+0x84/0xa8 > do_raw_spin_lock+0xd0/0x108 > _raw_spin_lock+0x20/0x30 > free_huge_page+0x9c/0x260 > __put_compound_page+0x44/0x50 > __put_page+0x2c/0x60 > alloc_surplus_huge_page.constprop.19+0xf0/0x140 > hugetlb_acct_memory+0x104/0x378 > hugetlb_reserve_pages+0xe0/0x250 > hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xc0/0x140 > mmap_region+0x3e8/0x5b0 > do_mmap+0x280/0x460 > vm_mmap_pgoff+0xf4/0x128 > ksys_mmap_pgoff+0xb4/0x258 > __arm64_sys_mmap+0x34/0x48 > el0_svc_common+0x78/0x130 > el0_svc_handler+0x38/0x78 > el0_svc+0x8/0xc > > Fixes: 9980d744a0 ("mm, hugetlb: get rid of surplus page accounting tricks") > Signed-off-by: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Feilong Lin <linfeilong@huawei.com> > Reported-by: Wang Wang <wangwang2@huawei.com> > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > --- > v1->v2: add Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> A new version for single ack is usually an overkill and only makes the situation more confusing. You have also didn't add Cc: stable as suggested during the review. That part is arguably more important. You also haven't CCed Andrew (now done) and your patch will not get merged without him applying it. Anyway, let's wait for Andrew to pick this patch up. > > mm/hugetlb.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c > index 6cdc7b2..c1e7b81 100644 > --- a/mm/hugetlb.c > +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c > @@ -1574,8 +1574,9 @@ static struct page *alloc_surplus_huge_page(struct hstate *h, gfp_t gfp_mask, > */ > if (h->surplus_huge_pages >= h->nr_overcommit_huge_pages) { > SetPageHugeTemporary(page); > + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock); > put_page(page); > - page = NULL; > + return NULL; > } else { > h->surplus_huge_pages++; > h->surplus_huge_pages_node[page_to_nid(page)]++; > -- > 1.8.3.1 >
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 10:06:38PM +0800, Zhiqiang Liu wrote: > From: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > > spinlock recursion happened when do LTP test: > #!/bin/bash > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > > The dtor returned by get_compound_page_dtor in __put_compound_page > may be the function of free_huge_page which will lock the hugetlb_lock, > so don't put_page in lock of hugetlb_lock. > > BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, hugemmap05/1079 > lock: hugetlb_lock+0x0/0x18, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: hugemmap05/1079, .owner_cpu: 0 > Call trace: > dump_backtrace+0x0/0x198 > show_stack+0x24/0x30 > dump_stack+0xa4/0xcc > spin_dump+0x84/0xa8 > do_raw_spin_lock+0xd0/0x108 > _raw_spin_lock+0x20/0x30 > free_huge_page+0x9c/0x260 > __put_compound_page+0x44/0x50 > __put_page+0x2c/0x60 > alloc_surplus_huge_page.constprop.19+0xf0/0x140 > hugetlb_acct_memory+0x104/0x378 > hugetlb_reserve_pages+0xe0/0x250 > hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xc0/0x140 > mmap_region+0x3e8/0x5b0 > do_mmap+0x280/0x460 > vm_mmap_pgoff+0xf4/0x128 > ksys_mmap_pgoff+0xb4/0x258 > __arm64_sys_mmap+0x34/0x48 > el0_svc_common+0x78/0x130 > el0_svc_handler+0x38/0x78 > el0_svc+0x8/0xc > > Fixes: 9980d744a0 ("mm, hugetlb: get rid of surplus page accounting tricks") > Signed-off-by: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Feilong Lin <linfeilong@huawei.com> > Reported-by: Wang Wang <wangwang2@huawei.com> > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
> On Mon 06-05-19 22:06:38, Zhiqiang Liu wrote: >> From: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> >> >> spinlock recursion happened when do LTP test: >> #!/bin/bash >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> >> The dtor returned by get_compound_page_dtor in __put_compound_page >> may be the function of free_huge_page which will lock the hugetlb_lock, >> so don't put_page in lock of hugetlb_lock. >> >> BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, hugemmap05/1079 >> lock: hugetlb_lock+0x0/0x18, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: hugemmap05/1079, .owner_cpu: 0 >> Call trace: >> dump_backtrace+0x0/0x198 >> show_stack+0x24/0x30 >> dump_stack+0xa4/0xcc >> spin_dump+0x84/0xa8 >> do_raw_spin_lock+0xd0/0x108 >> _raw_spin_lock+0x20/0x30 >> free_huge_page+0x9c/0x260 >> __put_compound_page+0x44/0x50 >> __put_page+0x2c/0x60 >> alloc_surplus_huge_page.constprop.19+0xf0/0x140 >> hugetlb_acct_memory+0x104/0x378 >> hugetlb_reserve_pages+0xe0/0x250 >> hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xc0/0x140 >> mmap_region+0x3e8/0x5b0 >> do_mmap+0x280/0x460 >> vm_mmap_pgoff+0xf4/0x128 >> ksys_mmap_pgoff+0xb4/0x258 >> __arm64_sys_mmap+0x34/0x48 >> el0_svc_common+0x78/0x130 >> el0_svc_handler+0x38/0x78 >> el0_svc+0x8/0xc >> >> Fixes: 9980d744a0 ("mm, hugetlb: get rid of surplus page accounting tricks") >> Signed-off-by: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> >> Signed-off-by: Feilong Lin <linfeilong@huawei.com> >> Reported-by: Wang Wang <wangwang2@huawei.com> >> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> >> --- >> v1->v2: add Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > > A new version for single ack is usually an overkill and only makes the > situation more confusing. You have also didn't add Cc: stable as > suggested during the review. That part is arguably more important. > > You also haven't CCed Andrew (now done) and your patch will not get > merged without him applying it. Anyway, let's wait for Andrew to pick > this patch up. > Thank you for your patience. I am sorry for misunderstanding your advice in your last mail. Does adding Cc: stable mean adding Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> tag in the patch or Ccing stable@vger.kernel.org when sending the new mail? You are very nice. Thanks again. >> mm/hugetlb.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c >> index 6cdc7b2..c1e7b81 100644 >> --- a/mm/hugetlb.c >> +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c >> @@ -1574,8 +1574,9 @@ static struct page *alloc_surplus_huge_page(struct hstate *h, gfp_t gfp_mask, >> */ >> if (h->surplus_huge_pages >= h->nr_overcommit_huge_pages) { >> SetPageHugeTemporary(page); >> + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock); >> put_page(page); >> - page = NULL; >> + return NULL; >> } else { >> h->surplus_huge_pages++; >> h->surplus_huge_pages_node[page_to_nid(page)]++; >> -- >> 1.8.3.1 >> >
On 5/6/19 7:06 AM, Zhiqiang Liu wrote: > From: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > > spinlock recursion happened when do LTP test: > #!/bin/bash > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > > The dtor returned by get_compound_page_dtor in __put_compound_page > may be the function of free_huge_page which will lock the hugetlb_lock, > so don't put_page in lock of hugetlb_lock. > > BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, hugemmap05/1079 > lock: hugetlb_lock+0x0/0x18, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: hugemmap05/1079, .owner_cpu: 0 > Call trace: > dump_backtrace+0x0/0x198 > show_stack+0x24/0x30 > dump_stack+0xa4/0xcc > spin_dump+0x84/0xa8 > do_raw_spin_lock+0xd0/0x108 > _raw_spin_lock+0x20/0x30 > free_huge_page+0x9c/0x260 > __put_compound_page+0x44/0x50 > __put_page+0x2c/0x60 > alloc_surplus_huge_page.constprop.19+0xf0/0x140 > hugetlb_acct_memory+0x104/0x378 > hugetlb_reserve_pages+0xe0/0x250 > hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xc0/0x140 > mmap_region+0x3e8/0x5b0 > do_mmap+0x280/0x460 > vm_mmap_pgoff+0xf4/0x128 > ksys_mmap_pgoff+0xb4/0x258 > __arm64_sys_mmap+0x34/0x48 > el0_svc_common+0x78/0x130 > el0_svc_handler+0x38/0x78 > el0_svc+0x8/0xc > > Fixes: 9980d744a0 ("mm, hugetlb: get rid of surplus page accounting tricks") > Signed-off-by: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Feilong Lin <linfeilong@huawei.com> > Reported-by: Wang Wang <wangwang2@huawei.com> > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Good catch. Sorry, for the late reply. Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
On Mon 06-05-19 23:22:08, Zhiqiang Liu wrote: [...] > Does adding Cc: stable mean adding Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > tag in the patch or Ccing stable@vger.kernel.org when sending the new mail? The former. See Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst for more. Thanks!
> On Mon 06-05-19 23:22:08, Zhiqiang Liu wrote: > [...] >> Does adding Cc: stable mean adding Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> >> tag in the patch or Ccing stable@vger.kernel.org when sending the new mail? > > The former. See Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst for more. > > Thanks! Thank you, Oscar Salvador and Mike Kravetz again. >
> On 5/6/19 7:06 AM, Zhiqiang Liu wrote: >> From: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> >> >> spinlock recursion happened when do LTP test: >> #!/bin/bash >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & >> >> The dtor returned by get_compound_page_dtor in __put_compound_page >> may be the function of free_huge_page which will lock the hugetlb_lock, >> so don't put_page in lock of hugetlb_lock. >> >> BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, hugemmap05/1079 >> lock: hugetlb_lock+0x0/0x18, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: hugemmap05/1079, .owner_cpu: 0 >> Call trace: >> dump_backtrace+0x0/0x198 >> show_stack+0x24/0x30 >> dump_stack+0xa4/0xcc >> spin_dump+0x84/0xa8 >> do_raw_spin_lock+0xd0/0x108 >> _raw_spin_lock+0x20/0x30 >> free_huge_page+0x9c/0x260 >> __put_compound_page+0x44/0x50 >> __put_page+0x2c/0x60 >> alloc_surplus_huge_page.constprop.19+0xf0/0x140 >> hugetlb_acct_memory+0x104/0x378 >> hugetlb_reserve_pages+0xe0/0x250 >> hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xc0/0x140 >> mmap_region+0x3e8/0x5b0 >> do_mmap+0x280/0x460 >> vm_mmap_pgoff+0xf4/0x128 >> ksys_mmap_pgoff+0xb4/0x258 >> __arm64_sys_mmap+0x34/0x48 >> el0_svc_common+0x78/0x130 >> el0_svc_handler+0x38/0x78 >> el0_svc+0x8/0xc >> >> Fixes: 9980d744a0 ("mm, hugetlb: get rid of surplus page accounting tricks") >> Signed-off-by: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> >> Signed-off-by: Feilong Lin <linfeilong@huawei.com> >> Reported-by: Wang Wang <wangwang2@huawei.com> >> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > > Good catch. Sorry, for the late reply. > > Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> > Thank your for the reply. Friendly ping ...
On Mon, 6 May 2019 22:06:38 +0800 Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@huawei.com> wrote: > From: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > > spinlock recursion happened when do LTP test: > #!/bin/bash > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > ./runltp -p -f hugetlb & > > The dtor returned by get_compound_page_dtor in __put_compound_page > may be the function of free_huge_page which will lock the hugetlb_lock, > so don't put_page in lock of hugetlb_lock. > > BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, hugemmap05/1079 > lock: hugetlb_lock+0x0/0x18, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: hugemmap05/1079, .owner_cpu: 0 > Call trace: > dump_backtrace+0x0/0x198 > show_stack+0x24/0x30 > dump_stack+0xa4/0xcc > spin_dump+0x84/0xa8 > do_raw_spin_lock+0xd0/0x108 > _raw_spin_lock+0x20/0x30 > free_huge_page+0x9c/0x260 > __put_compound_page+0x44/0x50 > __put_page+0x2c/0x60 > alloc_surplus_huge_page.constprop.19+0xf0/0x140 > hugetlb_acct_memory+0x104/0x378 > hugetlb_reserve_pages+0xe0/0x250 > hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xc0/0x140 > mmap_region+0x3e8/0x5b0 > do_mmap+0x280/0x460 > vm_mmap_pgoff+0xf4/0x128 > ksys_mmap_pgoff+0xb4/0x258 > __arm64_sys_mmap+0x34/0x48 > el0_svc_common+0x78/0x130 > el0_svc_handler+0x38/0x78 > el0_svc+0x8/0xc > > Fixes: 9980d744a0 ("mm, hugetlb: get rid of surplus page accounting tricks") > Signed-off-by: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Feilong Lin <linfeilong@huawei.com> > Reported-by: Wang Wang <wangwang2@huawei.com> > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> THanks. I added cc:stable@vger.kernel.org to this.
diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c index 6cdc7b2..c1e7b81 100644 --- a/mm/hugetlb.c +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c @@ -1574,8 +1574,9 @@ static struct page *alloc_surplus_huge_page(struct hstate *h, gfp_t gfp_mask, */ if (h->surplus_huge_pages >= h->nr_overcommit_huge_pages) { SetPageHugeTemporary(page); + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock); put_page(page); - page = NULL; + return NULL; } else { h->surplus_huge_pages++; h->surplus_huge_pages_node[page_to_nid(page)]++;