Re: [PATCH 2/6] mm: mark all calls into the vmalloc subsystem as potentially sleeping
From: Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com>
Date: 2016-11-08 14:31:50
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On 11/08/2016 04:24 PM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:15 AM, Chris Wilson [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 08:56:07AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:quoted
This is how everyone seems to already use them, but let's make that explicit.Ah, found an exception, vmapped stacks: [ 696.928541] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/vmalloc.c:615 [ 696.928576] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 30521, name: bash [ 696.928590] 1 lock held by bash/30521: [ 696.928600] #0: [ 696.928606] (vmap_area_lock[ 696.928619] ){+.+...}, at: [ 696.928640] [<ffffffff8115f0cf>] __purge_vmap_area_lazy+0x30f/0x370 [ 696.928656] CPU: 0 PID: 30521 Comm: bash Tainted: G W 4.9.0-rc1+ #124 [ 696.928672] Hardware name: / , BIOS PYBSWCEL.86A.0027.2015.0507.1758 05/07/2015 [ 696.928690] ffffc900070f7c70 ffffffff812be1f5 ffff8802750b6680 ffffffff819650a6 [ 696.928717] ffffc900070f7c98 ffffffff810a3216 0000000000004001 ffff8802726e16c0 [ 696.928743] ffff8802726e19a0 ffffc900070f7d08 ffffffff8115f0f3 ffff8802750b6680 [ 696.928768] Call Trace: [ 696.928782] [<ffffffff812be1f5>] dump_stack+0x68/0x93 [ 696.928796] [<ffffffff810a3216>] ___might_sleep+0x166/0x220 [ 696.928809] [<ffffffff8115f0f3>] __purge_vmap_area_lazy+0x333/0x370 [ 696.928823] [<ffffffff8115ea68>] ? vunmap_page_range+0x1e8/0x350 [ 696.928837] [<ffffffff8115f1b3>] free_vmap_area_noflush+0x83/0x90 [ 696.928850] [<ffffffff81160931>] remove_vm_area+0x71/0xb0 [ 696.928863] [<ffffffff81160999>] __vunmap+0x29/0xf0 [ 696.928875] [<ffffffff81160ab9>] vfree+0x29/0x70 [ 696.928888] [<ffffffff81071746>] put_task_stack+0x76/0x120From this traceback, it looks like the lock causing the atomic context was actually acquired in the vfree path itself, and not by the vmapped stack user (as it says "vmap_area_lock" held). I am still wondering why vmap_area_lock was held during the might_sleep(), perhaps you may not have applied all patches from Chris H?
I don't think that this splat is because we holding vmap_area_lock.
Look at cond_resched_lock:
#define cond_resched_lock(lock) ({ \
___might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET);\
__cond_resched_lock(lock); \
})
It calls might_sleep() with spin lock still held.
AFAIU PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET supposed to tell might_sleep() to ignore spin locks
and complain iff something else changed preempt_count.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>