| Message ID | 20200710075050.4769-1-jgross@suse.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | xen: don't reschedule in preemption off sections | expand |
On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: > For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is > calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has > been interrupted. > > Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done via some ioctl()s > are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a > preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is > started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq > handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to > rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set > preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 > in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 20775, name: xl > INFO: lockdep is turned off. > CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 > Call Trace: > <IRQ> > dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 > ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 > xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 > xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 > RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 > Code: ... > RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 > RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a > RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 > RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 > R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 > ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 > ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 > ? check_events+0x12/0x20 > ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 > ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 > ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 > ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 > ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 > ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] > ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] > ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 > ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b > ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 > ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 > ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 > </IRQ> > ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 > ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 > ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] > ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 > ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 > ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 > ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 > ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 > ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe > > Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). > > In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the entry code rework. > > Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> > Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use need_resched() instead of should_resched()") > Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> > Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > --- > drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c > index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 > --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c > +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); > asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) > { > if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) > - && need_resched())) { > + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? Jan
On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: >> For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is >> calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has >> been interrupted. >> >> Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done via some ioctl()s >> are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a >> preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is >> started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq >> handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to >> rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set >> preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: >> >> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 >> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 20775, name: xl >> INFO: lockdep is turned off. >> CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 >> Call Trace: >> <IRQ> >> dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 >> ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 >> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 >> xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 >> RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >> Code: ... >> RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 >> RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a >> RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 >> RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 >> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 >> R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 >> ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >> ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 >> ? check_events+0x12/0x20 >> ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 >> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >> ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 >> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >> ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 >> ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] >> ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] >> ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 >> ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b >> ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 >> ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 >> ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 >> </IRQ> >> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 >> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 >> ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] >> ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 >> ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 >> ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 >> ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 >> ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 >> ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe >> >> Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). >> >> In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the entry code rework. >> >> Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >> Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use need_resched() instead of should_resched()") >> Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> >> --- >> drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >> index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 >> --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c >> +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); >> asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) >> { >> if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) >> - && need_resched())) { >> + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { > > Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in > other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one > that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, > clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or > xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we have seen are related to this problem. And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would be fine, but it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would need to be used for the decision whether to call cond_resched() and then the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). This is basically the code flow as in kernel 5.8, but the flag handling would need to be spread over various source files. A problem would be possible only in case there is a missing preempt_disable() when doing a hypercall which should not be subject to be interrupted by scheduling, but then a kernel configured with preemption would already have a problem. In order to keep this patch - which is for stable only, after all - as simple as possible I'd rather leave it as is. Juergen
On 10.07.2020 12:50, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is >>> calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has >>> been interrupted. >>> >>> Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done via some ioctl()s >>> are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a >>> preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is >>> started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq >>> handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to >>> rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set >>> preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: >>> >>> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 >>> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 20775, name: xl >>> INFO: lockdep is turned off. >>> CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 >>> Call Trace: >>> <IRQ> >>> dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 >>> ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 >>> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 >>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 >>> RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>> Code: ... >>> RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 >>> RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a >>> RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 >>> RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 >>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 >>> R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 >>> ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>> ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 >>> ? check_events+0x12/0x20 >>> ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 >>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>> ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 >>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>> ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 >>> ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] >>> ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] >>> ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 >>> ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b >>> ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 >>> ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 >>> ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 >>> </IRQ> >>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 >>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 >>> ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] >>> ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 >>> ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 >>> ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 >>> ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 >>> ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 >>> ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe >>> >>> Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). >>> >>> In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the entry code rework. >>> >>> Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>> Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use need_resched() instead of should_resched()") >>> Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>> index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>> +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); >>> asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) >>> { >>> if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) >>> - && need_resched())) { >>> + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { >> >> Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in >> other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one >> that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, >> clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or >> xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? > > First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels > aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need > CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't > seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we > have seen are related to this problem. > > And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would be fine, but > it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. > What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. > __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as > a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would > need to be used for the decision whether to call cond_resched() and then > the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). I'm afraid I don't follow: If __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() cleared the flag, xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() would amount to a no-op (up and until the flag's prior value would get restored), wouldn't it? No need to pass anything into there. Jan
On 10.07.20 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 10.07.2020 12:50, Jürgen Groß wrote: >> On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>> For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is >>>> calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has >>>> been interrupted. >>>> >>>> Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done via some ioctl()s >>>> are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a >>>> preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is >>>> started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq >>>> handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to >>>> rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set >>>> preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: >>>> >>>> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 >>>> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 20775, name: xl >>>> INFO: lockdep is turned off. >>>> CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 >>>> Call Trace: >>>> <IRQ> >>>> dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 >>>> ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 >>>> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 >>>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 >>>> RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>> Code: ... >>>> RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 >>>> RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a >>>> RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 >>>> RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 >>>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 >>>> R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 >>>> ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>> ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 >>>> ? check_events+0x12/0x20 >>>> ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 >>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>> ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 >>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>> ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 >>>> ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] >>>> ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] >>>> ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 >>>> ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b >>>> ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 >>>> ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 >>>> ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 >>>> </IRQ> >>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 >>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 >>>> ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] >>>> ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 >>>> ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 >>>> ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 >>>> ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 >>>> ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 >>>> ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe >>>> >>>> Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). >>>> >>>> In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the entry code rework. >>>> >>>> Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>> Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use need_resched() instead of should_resched()") >>>> Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>> index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); >>>> asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) >>>> { >>>> if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) >>>> - && need_resched())) { >>>> + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { >>> >>> Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in >>> other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one >>> that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, >>> clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or >>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? >> >> First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels >> aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need >> CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't >> seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we >> have seen are related to this problem. >> >> And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would be fine, but >> it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. >> What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. >> __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as >> a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would >> need to be used for the decision whether to call cond_resched() and then >> the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). > > I'm afraid I don't follow: If __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() cleared the flag, > xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() would amount to a no-op (up and until the > flag's prior value would get restored), wouldn't it? No need to pass > anything into there. The problem is after __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() restoring the flag. As soon as irq_exit() is being called (either by xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or by the caller of xen_hvm_evtchn_do_upcall()) softirq handling might be executed resulting in another hypercall, which might be preempted afterwards. And this is the case which happened in the original report by Sarah. Juergen
On 7/10/20 5:01 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 10.07.20 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 10.07.2020 12:50, Jürgen Groß wrote: >>> On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>> For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is >>>>> calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has >>>>> been interrupted. >>>>> >>>>> Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done via some ioctl()s >>>>> are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a >>>>> preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is >>>>> started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq >>>>> handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to >>>>> rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set >>>>> preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: >>>>> >>>>> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 >>>>> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 20775, name: xl >>>>> INFO: lockdep is turned off. >>>>> CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 >>>>> Call Trace: >>>>> <IRQ> >>>>> dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 >>>>> ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 >>>>> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 >>>>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 >>>>> RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>>> Code: ... >>>>> RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 >>>>> RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a >>>>> RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 >>>>> RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 >>>>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 >>>>> R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 >>>>> ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>>> ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 >>>>> ? check_events+0x12/0x20 >>>>> ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 >>>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>>> ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 >>>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>>> ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 >>>>> ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] >>>>> ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] >>>>> ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 >>>>> ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b >>>>> ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 >>>>> ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 >>>>> ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 >>>>> </IRQ> >>>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 >>>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 >>>>> ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] >>>>> ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 >>>>> ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 >>>>> ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 >>>>> ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 >>>>> ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 >>>>> ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe >>>>> >>>>> Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). >>>>> >>>>> In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the entry code rework. >>>>> >>>>> Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>>> Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use need_resched() instead of should_resched()") >>>>> Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>> index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); >>>>> asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) >>>>> { >>>>> if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) >>>>> - && need_resched())) { >>>>> + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { >>>> >>>> Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in >>>> other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one >>>> that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, >>>> clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or >>>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? >>> >>> First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels >>> aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need >>> CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't >>> seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we >>> have seen are related to this problem. >>> >>> And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would be fine, but >>> it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. >>> What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. >>> __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as >>> a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would >>> need to be used for the decision whether to call cond_resched() and then >>> the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). >> >> I'm afraid I don't follow: If __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() cleared the flag, >> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() would amount to a no-op (up and until the >> flag's prior value would get restored), wouldn't it? No need to pass >> anything into there. > > The problem is after __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() restoring the flag. > As soon as irq_exit() is being called (either by xen_evtchn_do_upcall() > or by the caller of xen_hvm_evtchn_do_upcall()) softirq handling might > be executed resulting in another hypercall, which might be preempted > afterwards. And this is the case which happened in the original > report by Sarah. Tested-by: Chris Brannon <cmb@prgmr.com> We're no longer observing this bug. We've been running this on a test system for about 3 weeks. Is it possible to merge? Thanks, Sarah
On 19.08.20 18:57, Sarah Newman wrote: > On 7/10/20 5:01 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote: >> On 10.07.20 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 10.07.2020 12:50, Jürgen Groß wrote: >>>> On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>> For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is >>>>>> calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has >>>>>> been interrupted. >>>>>> >>>>>> Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done via some >>>>>> ioctl()s >>>>>> are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a >>>>>> preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is >>>>>> started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq >>>>>> handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to >>>>>> rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set >>>>>> preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: >>>>>> >>>>>> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at >>>>>> drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 >>>>>> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 20775, >>>>>> name: xl >>>>>> INFO: lockdep is turned off. >>>>>> CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W >>>>>> 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 >>>>>> Call Trace: >>>>>> <IRQ> >>>>>> dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 >>>>>> ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 >>>>>> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 >>>>>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 >>>>>> RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>>>> Code: ... >>>>>> RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 >>>>>> RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a >>>>>> RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 >>>>>> RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 >>>>>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 >>>>>> R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 >>>>>> ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>>>> ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 >>>>>> ? check_events+0x12/0x20 >>>>>> ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 >>>>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>>>> ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 >>>>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>>>> ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 >>>>>> ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] >>>>>> ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] >>>>>> ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 >>>>>> ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b >>>>>> ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 >>>>>> ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 >>>>>> ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 >>>>>> </IRQ> >>>>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 >>>>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 >>>>>> ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] >>>>>> ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 >>>>>> ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 >>>>>> ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 >>>>>> ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 >>>>>> ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 >>>>>> ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe >>>>>> >>>>>> Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). >>>>>> >>>>>> In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the entry code >>>>>> rework. >>>>>> >>>>>> Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>>>> Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use need_resched() >>>>>> instead of should_resched()") >>>>>> Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>>> index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); >>>>>> asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) >>>>>> { >>>>>> if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) >>>>>> - && need_resched())) { >>>>>> + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { >>>>> >>>>> Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in >>>>> other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one >>>>> that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, >>>>> clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or >>>>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? >>>> >>>> First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels >>>> aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need >>>> CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't >>>> seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we >>>> have seen are related to this problem. >>>> >>>> And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would be fine, >>>> but >>>> it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. >>>> What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. >>>> __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as >>>> a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would >>>> need to be used for the decision whether to call cond_resched() and >>>> then >>>> the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). >>> >>> I'm afraid I don't follow: If __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() cleared the flag, >>> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() would amount to a no-op (up and until the >>> flag's prior value would get restored), wouldn't it? No need to pass >>> anything into there. >> >> The problem is after __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() restoring the flag. >> As soon as irq_exit() is being called (either by xen_evtchn_do_upcall() >> or by the caller of xen_hvm_evtchn_do_upcall()) softirq handling might >> be executed resulting in another hypercall, which might be preempted >> afterwards. And this is the case which happened in the original >> report by Sarah. > > Tested-by: Chris Brannon <cmb@prgmr.com> > > We're no longer observing this bug. We've been running this on a test > system for about 3 weeks. Is it possible to merge? Greg, could you please take the patch for stable? Juergen
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 07:13:00AM +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 19.08.20 18:57, Sarah Newman wrote: > > On 7/10/20 5:01 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote: > > > On 10.07.20 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 10.07.2020 12:50, Jürgen Groß wrote: > > > > > On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: > > > > > > > For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is > > > > > > > calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has > > > > > > > been interrupted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done > > > > > > > via some ioctl()s > > > > > > > are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a > > > > > > > preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is > > > > > > > started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq > > > > > > > handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to > > > > > > > rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set > > > > > > > preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context > > > > > > > at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 > > > > > > > in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, > > > > > > > pid: 20775, name: xl > > > > > > > INFO: lockdep is turned off. > > > > > > > CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W > > > > > > > 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 > > > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > > > <IRQ> > > > > > > > dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 > > > > > > > ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 > > > > > > > xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 > > > > > > > xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 > > > > > > > RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 > > > > > > > Code: ... > > > > > > > RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 > > > > > > > RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a > > > > > > > RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 > > > > > > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 > > > > > > > R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 > > > > > > > ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 > > > > > > > ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 > > > > > > > ? check_events+0x12/0x20 > > > > > > > ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 > > > > > > > ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 > > > > > > > ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 > > > > > > > ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 > > > > > > > ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 > > > > > > > ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] > > > > > > > ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] > > > > > > > ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 > > > > > > > ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b > > > > > > > ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 > > > > > > > ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 > > > > > > > ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 > > > > > > > </IRQ> > > > > > > > ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 > > > > > > > ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 > > > > > > > ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] > > > > > > > ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 > > > > > > > ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 > > > > > > > ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 > > > > > > > ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 > > > > > > > ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 > > > > > > > ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the > > > > > > > entry code rework. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> > > > > > > > Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use > > > > > > > need_resched() instead of should_resched()") > > > > > > > Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c > > > > > > > index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c > > > > > > > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); > > > > > > > asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) > > > > > > > - && need_resched())) { > > > > > > > + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in > > > > > > other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one > > > > > > that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, > > > > > > clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or > > > > > > xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? > > > > > > > > > > First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels > > > > > aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need > > > > > CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't > > > > > seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we > > > > > have seen are related to this problem. > > > > > > > > > > And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would > > > > > be fine, but > > > > > it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. > > > > > What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. > > > > > __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as > > > > > a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would > > > > > need to be used for the decision whether to call > > > > > cond_resched() and then > > > > > the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). > > > > > > > > I'm afraid I don't follow: If __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() cleared the flag, > > > > xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() would amount to a no-op (up and until the > > > > flag's prior value would get restored), wouldn't it? No need to pass > > > > anything into there. > > > > > > The problem is after __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() restoring the flag. > > > As soon as irq_exit() is being called (either by xen_evtchn_do_upcall() > > > or by the caller of xen_hvm_evtchn_do_upcall()) softirq handling might > > > be executed resulting in another hypercall, which might be preempted > > > afterwards. And this is the case which happened in the original > > > report by Sarah. > > > > Tested-by: Chris Brannon <cmb@prgmr.com> > > > > We're no longer observing this bug. We've been running this on a test > > system for about 3 weeks. Is it possible to merge? > > Greg, could you please take the patch for stable? What is the git commit id of the patch in Linus's tree? And what stable tree(s) should it go to? thanks, greg k-h
On 20.08.20 07:44, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 07:13:00AM +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote: >> On 19.08.20 18:57, Sarah Newman wrote: >>> On 7/10/20 5:01 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote: >>>> On 10.07.20 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 10.07.2020 12:50, Jürgen Groß wrote: >>>>>> On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>> On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>>>> For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is >>>>>>>> calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has >>>>>>>> been interrupted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done >>>>>>>> via some ioctl()s >>>>>>>> are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a >>>>>>>> preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is >>>>>>>> started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq >>>>>>>> handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to >>>>>>>> rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set >>>>>>>> preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context >>>>>>>> at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 >>>>>>>> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, >>>>>>>> pid: 20775, name: xl >>>>>>>> INFO: lockdep is turned off. >>>>>>>> CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W >>>>>>>> 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 >>>>>>>> Call Trace: >>>>>>>> <IRQ> >>>>>>>> dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 >>>>>>>> ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 >>>>>>>> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 >>>>>>>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 >>>>>>>> RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>>>>>> Code: ... >>>>>>>> RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 >>>>>>>> RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a >>>>>>>> RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 >>>>>>>> RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 >>>>>>>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 >>>>>>>> R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 >>>>>>>> ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 >>>>>>>> ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 >>>>>>>> ? check_events+0x12/0x20 >>>>>>>> ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 >>>>>>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>>>>>> ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 >>>>>>>> ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 >>>>>>>> ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 >>>>>>>> ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] >>>>>>>> ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] >>>>>>>> ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 >>>>>>>> ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b >>>>>>>> ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 >>>>>>>> ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 >>>>>>>> ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 >>>>>>>> </IRQ> >>>>>>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 >>>>>>>> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 >>>>>>>> ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] >>>>>>>> ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 >>>>>>>> ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 >>>>>>>> ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 >>>>>>>> ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 >>>>>>>> ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 >>>>>>>> ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the >>>>>>>> entry code rework. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>>>>>> Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use >>>>>>>> need_resched() instead of should_resched()") >>>>>>>> Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>>>>> index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c >>>>>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); >>>>>>>> asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) >>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>> if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) >>>>>>>> - && need_resched())) { >>>>>>>> + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in >>>>>>> other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one >>>>>>> that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, >>>>>>> clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or >>>>>>> xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? >>>>>> >>>>>> First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels >>>>>> aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need >>>>>> CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't >>>>>> seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we >>>>>> have seen are related to this problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would >>>>>> be fine, but >>>>>> it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. >>>>>> What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. >>>>>> __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as >>>>>> a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would >>>>>> need to be used for the decision whether to call >>>>>> cond_resched() and then >>>>>> the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). >>>>> >>>>> I'm afraid I don't follow: If __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() cleared the flag, >>>>> xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() would amount to a no-op (up and until the >>>>> flag's prior value would get restored), wouldn't it? No need to pass >>>>> anything into there. >>>> >>>> The problem is after __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() restoring the flag. >>>> As soon as irq_exit() is being called (either by xen_evtchn_do_upcall() >>>> or by the caller of xen_hvm_evtchn_do_upcall()) softirq handling might >>>> be executed resulting in another hypercall, which might be preempted >>>> afterwards. And this is the case which happened in the original >>>> report by Sarah. >>> >>> Tested-by: Chris Brannon <cmb@prgmr.com> >>> >>> We're no longer observing this bug. We've been running this on a test >>> system for about 3 weeks. Is it possible to merge? >> >> Greg, could you please take the patch for stable? > > What is the git commit id of the patch in Linus's tree? There is none, as the issue was discovered only when the upstream kernel (5.8 at this time) was already modified in a way which would make the issue go away. Backporting those changes to stable (all the x86 entry code modifications of 5.8, summing up to IIRC more than 100 patches) would be not practical IMO. > And what stable tree(s) should it go to? The issue was introduced in 4.3 (see Fixes tag of the patch), so all stable kernels down to that. Juergen
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 07:58:55AM +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 20.08.20 07:44, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 07:13:00AM +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote: > > > On 19.08.20 18:57, Sarah Newman wrote: > > > > On 7/10/20 5:01 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote: > > > > > On 10.07.20 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > On 10.07.2020 12:50, Jürgen Groß wrote: > > > > > > > On 10.07.20 11:49, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > > On 10.07.2020 09:50, Juergen Gross wrote: > > > > > > > > > For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is > > > > > > > > > calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has > > > > > > > > > been interrupted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done > > > > > > > > > via some ioctl()s > > > > > > > > > are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a > > > > > > > > > preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is > > > > > > > > > started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq > > > > > > > > > handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to > > > > > > > > > rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set > > > > > > > > > preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context > > > > > > > > > at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 > > > > > > > > > in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, > > > > > > > > > pid: 20775, name: xl > > > > > > > > > INFO: lockdep is turned off. > > > > > > > > > CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W > > > > > > > > > 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 > > > > > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > > > > > <IRQ> > > > > > > > > > dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 > > > > > > > > > ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 > > > > > > > > > xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 > > > > > > > > > xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 > > > > > > > > > RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 > > > > > > > > > Code: ... > > > > > > > > > RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 > > > > > > > > > RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a > > > > > > > > > RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > > > RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 > > > > > > > > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 > > > > > > > > > R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 > > > > > > > > > ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 > > > > > > > > > ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 > > > > > > > > > ? check_events+0x12/0x20 > > > > > > > > > ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 > > > > > > > > > ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 > > > > > > > > > ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 > > > > > > > > > ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 > > > > > > > > > ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 > > > > > > > > > ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] > > > > > > > > > ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] > > > > > > > > > ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 > > > > > > > > > ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b > > > > > > > > > ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 > > > > > > > > > ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 > > > > > > > > > ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 > > > > > > > > > </IRQ> > > > > > > > > > ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 > > > > > > > > > ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 > > > > > > > > > ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] > > > > > > > > > ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 > > > > > > > > > ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 > > > > > > > > > ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 > > > > > > > > > ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 > > > > > > > > > ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 > > > > > > > > > ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the > > > > > > > > > entry code rework. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use > > > > > > > > > need_resched() instead of should_resched()") > > > > > > > > > Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c > > > > > > > > > index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 > > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c > > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c > > > > > > > > > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); > > > > > > > > > asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) > > > > > > > > > - && need_resched())) { > > > > > > > > > + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't this have the at least latent risk of hiding issues in > > > > > > > > other call trees (by no longer triggering logging like the one > > > > > > > > that has propmted this change)? Wouldn't it be better to save, > > > > > > > > clear, and restore the flag in one of xen_evtchn_do_upcall() or > > > > > > > > xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First regarding "risk of hiding issues": it seems as if lots of kernels > > > > > > > aren't even configured to trigger this logging. It would need > > > > > > > CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP to be enabled and at least SUSE kernels don't > > > > > > > seem to have it on. I suspect the occasional xen_mc_flush() failures we > > > > > > > have seen are related to this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And in theory saving, clearing and restoring the flag would > > > > > > > be fine, but > > > > > > > it can't be done in a single function with the code flow as up to 5.7. > > > > > > > What would need to be done is to save and clear the flag in e.g. > > > > > > > __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() and to pass it to xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() as > > > > > > > a parameter. In xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() the passed flag value would > > > > > > > need to be used for the decision whether to call > > > > > > > cond_resched() and then > > > > > > > the flag could be restored (after the cond_resched() call). > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm afraid I don't follow: If __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() cleared the flag, > > > > > > xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() would amount to a no-op (up and until the > > > > > > flag's prior value would get restored), wouldn't it? No need to pass > > > > > > anything into there. > > > > > > > > > > The problem is after __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() restoring the flag. > > > > > As soon as irq_exit() is being called (either by xen_evtchn_do_upcall() > > > > > or by the caller of xen_hvm_evtchn_do_upcall()) softirq handling might > > > > > be executed resulting in another hypercall, which might be preempted > > > > > afterwards. And this is the case which happened in the original > > > > > report by Sarah. > > > > > > > > Tested-by: Chris Brannon <cmb@prgmr.com> > > > > > > > > We're no longer observing this bug. We've been running this on a test > > > > system for about 3 weeks. Is it possible to merge? > > > > > > Greg, could you please take the patch for stable? > > > > What is the git commit id of the patch in Linus's tree? > > There is none, as the issue was discovered only when the upstream > kernel (5.8 at this time) was already modified in a way which would > make the issue go away. > > Backporting those changes to stable (all the x86 entry code > modifications of 5.8, summing up to IIRC more than 100 patches) > would be not practical IMO. Ok, can someone please resend this patch, with all of the gathered tested-by and the like, and explain this in the changelog text so it is obvious? > > And what stable tree(s) should it go to? > > The issue was introduced in 4.3 (see Fixes tag of the patch), so all > stable kernels down to that. So older than 5.8, ok, again, can that go in the changelog text? This is a long thread to have to dig that out of... thanks, greg k-h
diff --git a/drivers/xen/preempt.c b/drivers/xen/preempt.c index 17240c5325a3..6ad87b5c95ed 100644 --- a/drivers/xen/preempt.c +++ b/drivers/xen/preempt.c @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_in_preemptible_hcall); asmlinkage __visible void xen_maybe_preempt_hcall(void) { if (unlikely(__this_cpu_read(xen_in_preemptible_hcall) - && need_resched())) { + && need_resched() && !preempt_count())) { /* * Clear flag as we may be rescheduled on a different * cpu.
For support of long running hypercalls xen_maybe_preempt_hcall() is calling cond_resched() in case a hypercall marked as preemptible has been interrupted. Normally this is no problem, as only hypercalls done via some ioctl()s are marked to be preemptible. In rare cases when during such a preemptible hypercall an interrupt occurs and any softirq action is started from irq_exit(), a further hypercall issued by the softirq handler will be regarded to be preemptible, too. This might lead to rescheduling in spite of the softirq handler potentially having set preempt_disable(), leading to splats like: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/xen/preempt.c:37 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 20775, name: xl INFO: lockdep is turned off. CPU: 1 PID: 20775 Comm: xl Tainted: G D W 5.4.46-1_prgmr_debug.el7.x86_64 #1 Call Trace: <IRQ> dump_stack+0x8f/0xd0 ___might_sleep.cold.76+0xb2/0x103 xen_maybe_preempt_hcall+0x48/0x70 xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x37/0x40 RIP: e030:xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 Code: ... RSP: e02b:ffffc900400dcc30 EFLAGS: 00000246 RAX: 000000000004000d RBX: 0000000000000200 RCX: ffffffff8100122a RDX: ffff88812e788000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 RBP: ffffffff83ee3ad0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000001 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: ffff8881824aa0b0 R13: 0000000865496000 R14: 0000000865496000 R15: ffff88815d040000 ? xen_hypercall_xen_version+0xa/0x20 ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0x9/0x10 ? check_events+0x12/0x20 ? xen_restore_fl_direct+0x1f/0x20 ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 ? debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x91/0xc0 ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x53/0x60 ? xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu+0x3d/0x140 ? mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x6b6/0x1110 [mlx4_en] ? mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x64/0x100 [mlx4_en] ? net_rx_action+0x151/0x4a0 ? __do_softirq+0xed/0x55b ? irq_exit+0xea/0x100 ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x2c/0x40 ? xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x29/0x40 </IRQ> ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0xa/0x20 ? xen_hypercall_domctl+0x8/0x20 ? privcmd_ioctl+0x221/0x990 [xen_privcmd] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0xa5/0x6f0 ? ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90 ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x1a/0x20 ? __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20 ? do_syscall_64+0x62/0x250 ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe Fix that by testing preempt_count() before calling cond_resched(). In kernel 5.8 this can't happen any more due to the entry code rework. Reported-by: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> Fixes: 0fa2f5cb2b0ecd8 ("sched/preempt, xen: Use need_resched() instead of should_resched()") Cc: Sarah Newman <srn@prgmr.com> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> --- drivers/xen/preempt.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)