BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus disconnect"

6 messages, 5 authors, 2017-03-02 · open the first message on its own page

BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus disconnect"

From: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Date: 2017-03-02 11:59:07

With commits f16f1df65 and 9a6cdf52b we get in our Xen testing:

[  174.512861] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state
[  174.522735] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
/home/build/linux-linus/mm/vmalloc.c:1441
[  174.523451] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 28, name: xenwatch
[  174.524131] CPU: 1 PID: 28 Comm: xenwatch Tainted: G        W
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty #1
[  174.524819] Hardware name: MSI MS-7680/H61M-P23 (MS-7680), BIOS V17.0
03/14/2011
[  174.525517] Call Trace:
[  174.526217]  show_stack+0x23/0x60
[  174.526899]  dump_stack+0x5b/0x88
[  174.527562]  ___might_sleep+0xde/0x130
[  174.528208]  __might_sleep+0x35/0xa0
[  174.528840]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x13/0x20
[  174.529463]  ? __wake_up+0x40/0x50
[  174.530089]  remove_vm_area+0x20/0x90
[  174.530724]  __vunmap+0x1d/0xc0
[  174.531346]  ? delete_object_full+0x13/0x20
[  174.531973]  vfree+0x40/0x80
[  174.532594]  set_backend_state+0x18a/0xa90
[  174.533221]  ? dwc_scan_descriptors+0x24d/0x430
[  174.533850]  ? kfree+0x5b/0xc0
[  174.534476]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535101]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535718]  ? xenbus_gather+0x31/0x90
[  174.536332]  ? ___might_sleep+0xf6/0x130
[  174.536945]  frontend_changed+0x6b/0xd0
[  174.537565]  xenbus_otherend_changed+0x7d/0x80
[  174.538185]  frontend_changed+0x12/0x20
[  174.538803]  xenwatch_thread+0x74/0x110
[  174.539417]  ? woken_wake_function+0x20/0x20
[  174.540049]  kthread+0xe5/0x120
[  174.540663]  ? xenbus_printf+0x50/0x50
[  174.541278]  ? __kthread_init_worker+0x40/0x40
[  174.541898]  ret_from_fork+0x21/0x2c
[  174.548635] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state

I believe calling vfree() when holding a spin_lock isn't a good idea.

Boris, this is the dumpdata failure:
FAILURE 4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty(x86_64)
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty(i386)\: 2017-03-02 (tst007)


Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus disconnect"

From: Wei Liu <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-02 12:24:21

On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 12:56:20PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
With commits f16f1df65 and 9a6cdf52b we get in our Xen testing:

[  174.512861] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state
[  174.522735] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
/home/build/linux-linus/mm/vmalloc.c:1441
[  174.523451] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 28, name: xenwatch
[  174.524131] CPU: 1 PID: 28 Comm: xenwatch Tainted: G        W
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty #1
[  174.524819] Hardware name: MSI MS-7680/H61M-P23 (MS-7680), BIOS V17.0
03/14/2011
[  174.525517] Call Trace:
[  174.526217]  show_stack+0x23/0x60
[  174.526899]  dump_stack+0x5b/0x88
[  174.527562]  ___might_sleep+0xde/0x130
[  174.528208]  __might_sleep+0x35/0xa0
[  174.528840]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x13/0x20
[  174.529463]  ? __wake_up+0x40/0x50
[  174.530089]  remove_vm_area+0x20/0x90
[  174.530724]  __vunmap+0x1d/0xc0
[  174.531346]  ? delete_object_full+0x13/0x20
[  174.531973]  vfree+0x40/0x80
[  174.532594]  set_backend_state+0x18a/0xa90
[  174.533221]  ? dwc_scan_descriptors+0x24d/0x430
[  174.533850]  ? kfree+0x5b/0xc0
[  174.534476]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535101]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535718]  ? xenbus_gather+0x31/0x90
[  174.536332]  ? ___might_sleep+0xf6/0x130
[  174.536945]  frontend_changed+0x6b/0xd0
[  174.537565]  xenbus_otherend_changed+0x7d/0x80
[  174.538185]  frontend_changed+0x12/0x20
[  174.538803]  xenwatch_thread+0x74/0x110
[  174.539417]  ? woken_wake_function+0x20/0x20
[  174.540049]  kthread+0xe5/0x120
[  174.540663]  ? xenbus_printf+0x50/0x50
[  174.541278]  ? __kthread_init_worker+0x40/0x40
[  174.541898]  ret_from_fork+0x21/0x2c
[  174.548635] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state

I believe calling vfree() when holding a spin_lock isn't a good idea.
Use vfree_atomic instead?
Boris, this is the dumpdata failure:
FAILURE 4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty(x86_64)
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty(i386)\: 2017-03-02 (tst007)


Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

RE: BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus disconnect"

From: Paul Durrant <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-02 12:25:21

-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Gross [mailto:jgross@suse.com]
Sent: 02 March 2017 12:13
To: Wei Liu <redacted>
Cc: Igor Druzhinin <redacted>; xen-devel <xen-
devel@lists.xenproject.org>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-
kernel@vger.kernel.org>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Boris Ostrovsky
[off-list ref]; David Miller [off-list ref]; Paul
Durrant [off-list ref]
Subject: Re: BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus
disconnect"

On 02/03/17 13:06, Wei Liu wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 12:56:20PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
quoted
With commits f16f1df65 and 9a6cdf52b we get in our Xen testing:

[  174.512861] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state
[  174.522735] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
/home/build/linux-linus/mm/vmalloc.c:1441
[  174.523451] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 28, name: xenwatch
[  174.524131] CPU: 1 PID: 28 Comm: xenwatch Tainted: G        W
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty #1
[  174.524819] Hardware name: MSI MS-7680/H61M-P23 (MS-7680), BIOS
V17.0
quoted
quoted
03/14/2011
[  174.525517] Call Trace:
[  174.526217]  show_stack+0x23/0x60
[  174.526899]  dump_stack+0x5b/0x88
[  174.527562]  ___might_sleep+0xde/0x130
[  174.528208]  __might_sleep+0x35/0xa0
[  174.528840]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x13/0x20
[  174.529463]  ? __wake_up+0x40/0x50
[  174.530089]  remove_vm_area+0x20/0x90
[  174.530724]  __vunmap+0x1d/0xc0
[  174.531346]  ? delete_object_full+0x13/0x20
[  174.531973]  vfree+0x40/0x80
[  174.532594]  set_backend_state+0x18a/0xa90
[  174.533221]  ? dwc_scan_descriptors+0x24d/0x430
[  174.533850]  ? kfree+0x5b/0xc0
[  174.534476]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535101]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535718]  ? xenbus_gather+0x31/0x90
[  174.536332]  ? ___might_sleep+0xf6/0x130
[  174.536945]  frontend_changed+0x6b/0xd0
[  174.537565]  xenbus_otherend_changed+0x7d/0x80
[  174.538185]  frontend_changed+0x12/0x20
[  174.538803]  xenwatch_thread+0x74/0x110
[  174.539417]  ? woken_wake_function+0x20/0x20
[  174.540049]  kthread+0xe5/0x120
[  174.540663]  ? xenbus_printf+0x50/0x50
[  174.541278]  ? __kthread_init_worker+0x40/0x40
[  174.541898]  ret_from_fork+0x21/0x2c
[  174.548635] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state

I believe calling vfree() when holding a spin_lock isn't a good idea.
Use vfree_atomic instead?
Hmm, isn't this overkill here?

You can just set a local variable with the address and do vfree() after
releasing the lock.
Yep, that's what I was thinking. Patch coming shortly.

  Paul
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus disconnect"

From: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Date: 2017-03-02 13:05:41

On 02/03/17 13:06, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 12:56:20PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
quoted
With commits f16f1df65 and 9a6cdf52b we get in our Xen testing:

[  174.512861] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state
[  174.522735] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
/home/build/linux-linus/mm/vmalloc.c:1441
[  174.523451] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 28, name: xenwatch
[  174.524131] CPU: 1 PID: 28 Comm: xenwatch Tainted: G        W
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty #1
[  174.524819] Hardware name: MSI MS-7680/H61M-P23 (MS-7680), BIOS V17.0
03/14/2011
[  174.525517] Call Trace:
[  174.526217]  show_stack+0x23/0x60
[  174.526899]  dump_stack+0x5b/0x88
[  174.527562]  ___might_sleep+0xde/0x130
[  174.528208]  __might_sleep+0x35/0xa0
[  174.528840]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x13/0x20
[  174.529463]  ? __wake_up+0x40/0x50
[  174.530089]  remove_vm_area+0x20/0x90
[  174.530724]  __vunmap+0x1d/0xc0
[  174.531346]  ? delete_object_full+0x13/0x20
[  174.531973]  vfree+0x40/0x80
[  174.532594]  set_backend_state+0x18a/0xa90
[  174.533221]  ? dwc_scan_descriptors+0x24d/0x430
[  174.533850]  ? kfree+0x5b/0xc0
[  174.534476]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535101]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535718]  ? xenbus_gather+0x31/0x90
[  174.536332]  ? ___might_sleep+0xf6/0x130
[  174.536945]  frontend_changed+0x6b/0xd0
[  174.537565]  xenbus_otherend_changed+0x7d/0x80
[  174.538185]  frontend_changed+0x12/0x20
[  174.538803]  xenwatch_thread+0x74/0x110
[  174.539417]  ? woken_wake_function+0x20/0x20
[  174.540049]  kthread+0xe5/0x120
[  174.540663]  ? xenbus_printf+0x50/0x50
[  174.541278]  ? __kthread_init_worker+0x40/0x40
[  174.541898]  ret_from_fork+0x21/0x2c
[  174.548635] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state

I believe calling vfree() when holding a spin_lock isn't a good idea.
Use vfree_atomic instead?
Hmm, isn't this overkill here?

You can just set a local variable with the address and do vfree() after
releasing the lock.


Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus disconnect"

From: Igor Druzhinin <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-02 14:57:23

On 02/03/17 12:19, Paul Durrant wrote:
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Gross [mailto:jgross@suse.com]
Sent: 02 March 2017 12:13
To: Wei Liu <redacted>
Cc: Igor Druzhinin <redacted>; xen-devel <xen-
devel@lists.xenproject.org>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-
kernel@vger.kernel.org>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Boris Ostrovsky
[off-list ref]; David Miller [off-list ref]; Paul
Durrant [off-list ref]
Subject: Re: BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus
disconnect"

On 02/03/17 13:06, Wei Liu wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 12:56:20PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
quoted
With commits f16f1df65 and 9a6cdf52b we get in our Xen testing:

[  174.512861] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state
[  174.522735] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
/home/build/linux-linus/mm/vmalloc.c:1441
[  174.523451] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 28, name: xenwatch
[  174.524131] CPU: 1 PID: 28 Comm: xenwatch Tainted: G        W
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty #1
[  174.524819] Hardware name: MSI MS-7680/H61M-P23 (MS-7680), BIOS
V17.0
quoted
quoted
03/14/2011
[  174.525517] Call Trace:
[  174.526217]  show_stack+0x23/0x60
[  174.526899]  dump_stack+0x5b/0x88
[  174.527562]  ___might_sleep+0xde/0x130
[  174.528208]  __might_sleep+0x35/0xa0
[  174.528840]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x13/0x20
[  174.529463]  ? __wake_up+0x40/0x50
[  174.530089]  remove_vm_area+0x20/0x90
[  174.530724]  __vunmap+0x1d/0xc0
[  174.531346]  ? delete_object_full+0x13/0x20
[  174.531973]  vfree+0x40/0x80
[  174.532594]  set_backend_state+0x18a/0xa90
[  174.533221]  ? dwc_scan_descriptors+0x24d/0x430
[  174.533850]  ? kfree+0x5b/0xc0
[  174.534476]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535101]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535718]  ? xenbus_gather+0x31/0x90
[  174.536332]  ? ___might_sleep+0xf6/0x130
[  174.536945]  frontend_changed+0x6b/0xd0
[  174.537565]  xenbus_otherend_changed+0x7d/0x80
[  174.538185]  frontend_changed+0x12/0x20
[  174.538803]  xenwatch_thread+0x74/0x110
[  174.539417]  ? woken_wake_function+0x20/0x20
[  174.540049]  kthread+0xe5/0x120
[  174.540663]  ? xenbus_printf+0x50/0x50
[  174.541278]  ? __kthread_init_worker+0x40/0x40
[  174.541898]  ret_from_fork+0x21/0x2c
[  174.548635] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state

I believe calling vfree() when holding a spin_lock isn't a good idea.
Use vfree_atomic instead?
Hmm, isn't this overkill here?

You can just set a local variable with the address and do vfree() after
releasing the lock.
Yep, that's what I was thinking. Patch coming shortly.

  Paul
We have an internal patch that was just recently tested without using
spinlocks. Calling vfree in the spinlock section is not the worst that
could happen as our testing revealed. I switched to RCU for protecting
the environment from memory release. I'll share it today.

Igor
quoted
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: BUG due to "xen-netback: protect resource cleaning on XenBus disconnect"

From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Date: 2017-03-02 18:01:03

On 03/02/2017 06:56 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
With commits f16f1df65 and 9a6cdf52b we get in our Xen testing:

[  174.512861] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state
[  174.522735] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
/home/build/linux-linus/mm/vmalloc.c:1441
[  174.523451] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 28, name: xenwatch
[  174.524131] CPU: 1 PID: 28 Comm: xenwatch Tainted: G        W
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty #1
[  174.524819] Hardware name: MSI MS-7680/H61M-P23 (MS-7680), BIOS V17.0
03/14/2011
[  174.525517] Call Trace:
[  174.526217]  show_stack+0x23/0x60
[  174.526899]  dump_stack+0x5b/0x88
[  174.527562]  ___might_sleep+0xde/0x130
[  174.528208]  __might_sleep+0x35/0xa0
[  174.528840]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x13/0x20
[  174.529463]  ? __wake_up+0x40/0x50
[  174.530089]  remove_vm_area+0x20/0x90
[  174.530724]  __vunmap+0x1d/0xc0
[  174.531346]  ? delete_object_full+0x13/0x20
[  174.531973]  vfree+0x40/0x80
[  174.532594]  set_backend_state+0x18a/0xa90
[  174.533221]  ? dwc_scan_descriptors+0x24d/0x430
[  174.533850]  ? kfree+0x5b/0xc0
[  174.534476]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535101]  ? xenbus_read+0x3d/0x50
[  174.535718]  ? xenbus_gather+0x31/0x90
[  174.536332]  ? ___might_sleep+0xf6/0x130
[  174.536945]  frontend_changed+0x6b/0xd0
[  174.537565]  xenbus_otherend_changed+0x7d/0x80
[  174.538185]  frontend_changed+0x12/0x20
[  174.538803]  xenwatch_thread+0x74/0x110
[  174.539417]  ? woken_wake_function+0x20/0x20
[  174.540049]  kthread+0xe5/0x120
[  174.540663]  ? xenbus_printf+0x50/0x50
[  174.541278]  ? __kthread_init_worker+0x40/0x40
[  174.541898]  ret_from_fork+0x21/0x2c
[  174.548635] switch: port 2(vif3.0) entered disabled state

I believe calling vfree() when holding a spin_lock isn't a good idea.

Boris, this is the dumpdata failure:
FAILURE 4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty(x86_64)
4.10.0upstream-11073-g4977ab6-dirty(i386)\: 2017-03-02 (tst007)

That's not the cause of the test failure though --- it's "just" a warning.

The problem here was that 64- and 32-bit build trees got out of sync
(which is my fault, I switched the former to staging but forgot to do
the same for the latter). We have in  the log:

libxl: error: libxl_create.c:564:libxl__domain_make: domain creation
fail: Operation not supported
libxl: error: libxl_create.c:931:initiate_domain_create: cannot make
domain: -3

I now have both trees use staging.

-boris



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help