Thread (49 messages) 49 messages, 10 authors, 2016-02-25

[BUG] random kernel crashes after THP rework on s390 (maybe also on PowerPC and ARM)

From: Kirill A. Shutemov <hidden>
Date: 2016-02-12 23:15:17
Also in: linux-mm, linuxppc-dev, lkml

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 06:16:40PM +0100, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 16:57:27 +0100
Christian Borntraeger [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On 02/12/2016 04:41 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 08:57:02PM +0100, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
quoted
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 21:09:42 +0200
"Kirill A. Shutemov" [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 07:22:23PM +0100, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
quoted
Hi,

Sebastian Ott reported random kernel crashes beginning with v4.5-rc1 and
he also bisected this to commit 61f5d698 "mm: re-enable THP". Further
review of the THP rework patches, which cannot be bisected, revealed
commit fecffad "s390, thp: remove infrastructure for handling splitting PMDs"
(and also similar commits for other archs).

This commit removes the THP splitting bit and also the architecture
implementation of pmdp_splitting_flush(), which took care of the IPI for
fast_gup serialization. The commit message says

    pmdp_splitting_flush() is not needed too: on splitting PMD we will do
    pmdp_clear_flush() + set_pte_at().  pmdp_clear_flush() will do IPI as
    needed for fast_gup

The assumption that a TLB flush will also produce an IPI is wrong on s390,
and maybe also on other architectures, and I thought that this was actually
the main reason for having an arch-specific pmdp_splitting_flush().

At least PowerPC and ARM also had an individual implementation of
pmdp_splitting_flush() that used kick_all_cpus_sync() instead of a TLB
flush to send the IPI, and those were also removed. Putting the arch
maintainers and mailing lists on cc to verify.

On s390 this will break the IPI serialization against fast_gup, which
would certainly explain the random kernel crashes, please revert or fix
the pmdp_splitting_flush() removal.
Sorry for that.

I believe, the problem was already addressed for PowerPC:

http://lkml.kernel.org/g/454980831-16631-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar at linux.vnet.ibm.com

I think kick_all_cpus_sync() in arch-specific pmdp_invalidate() would do
the trick, right?
Hmm, not sure about that. After pmdp_invalidate(), a pmd_none() check in
fast_gup will still return false, because the pmd is not empty (at least
on s390). So I don't see spontaneously how it will help fast_gup to break
out to the slow path in case of THP splitting.
What pmdp_flush_direct() does in pmdp_invalidate()? It's hard to unwrap for me :-/
Does it make the pmd !pmd_present()?
It uses the idte instruction, which in an atomic fashion flushes the associated
TLB entry and changes the value of the pmd entry to invalid. This comes from the
HW requirement to not  change a PTE/PMD that might be still in use, other than 
with special instructions that does the tlb handling and the invalidation together.
Correct, and it does _not_ make the pmd !pmd_present(), that would only be the
case after a _clear_flush(). It only marks the pmd as invalid and flushes,
so that it cannot generate a new TLB entry before the following pmd_populate(),
but it keeps its other content. This is to fulfill the requirements outlined in
the comment in mm/huge_memory.c before the call to pmdp_invalidate(). And
independent from that comment, we would need such an _invalidate() or
_clear_flush() on s390 before the pmd_populate() because of the HW details
that Christian described.

Reading the comment again, I do now notice that it also says "mark the current
pmd notpresent", which we cannot do w/o losing the huge and (formerly) splitting
bits, but it also shouldn't be needed to provide the "single TLB guarantee" that
is required from the comment. So, a pmd_present() check on s390 in this state
would still return true. Not sure yet if this is a problem, need more thinking,
this behavior was already present before the THP rework but maybe it was OK
before and is not OK now.

At least for fast_gup this should not be a problem though.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the issue and I don't think missing
serialization with gup_fast is the cause -- we just don't need it
anymore.

Previously, __split_huge_page_splitting() required serialization against
gup_fast to make sure nobody can obtain new reference to the page after
__split_huge_page_splitting() returns. This was a way to stabilize page
references before starting to distribute them from head page to tail
pages.

With new refcounting, we don't care about this. Splitting PMD is now
decoupled from splitting underlying compound page. It's okay to get new
pins after split_huge_pmd(). To stabilize page references during
split_huge_page() we rely on setting up migration entries once all
pmds are split into page table entries.

The theory that serialization against gup_fast is not a root cause of the
crashes is consistent no crashes on arm64. Problem is somewhere else.
 
quoted
(It also does some some other magic to the attach_count, which might hold off
finish_arch_post_lock_switch while some flushing is happening, but this should
be unrelated here)

quoted
I'm also confused by pmd_none() is equal to !pmd_present() on s390. Hm?
Don't know, Gerald or Martin?
The implementation frequently changes depending on how many new bits Martin
needs to squeeze out :-)
One bit was freed up by the commit you've pointed to as a cause.
I wounder If it's possible that screw up something while removing it? I
don't see it, but who knows.

Could you check if revert of fecffad25458 helps?

And could you share how crashes looks like? I haven't seen backtraces yet.
We don't have a _PAGE_PRESENT bit for pmds, so pmd_present() just checks if the
entry is not empty. pmd_none() of course does the opposite, it checks if it is
empty.
-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help