From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: slab vs lockdep vs debugobjects
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:48:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1308592080.26237.114.camel@twins> (raw)
Hi Pekka,
Thomas found a fun lockdep splat, see below. Basically call_rcu() can
end up in kmem_cache_alloc(), and call_rcu() is used under
l3->list_lock, causing the splat. Since the debug kmem_cache isn't
SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU this shouldn't ever actually recurse.
Now, since this particular kmem_cache is created with
SLAB_DEBUG_OBJECTS, we thought it might be easy enough to set a separate
lockdep class for its l3->list_lock's.
However I found that the existing lockdep annotation is for kmalloc only
-- don't custom kmem_caches use OFF_SLAB?
Anyway, I got lost in slab (again), but would it make sense to move all
lockdep fixups into kmem_list3_init() or thereabouts?
---
=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
3.0.0-rc3+ #37
---------------------------------------------
udevd/124 is trying to acquire lock:
(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff81119619>] ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
but task is already holding lock:
(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff8111844e>] __cache_free+0x325/0x3ea
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock);
lock(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
2 locks held by udevd/124:
#0: (&(&(*({ do { const void *__vpp_verify = (typeof((&(slab_lock))))((void *)0); (void)__vpp_verify; } while (0); ({ unsigned long __ptr; __asm__ ("" : "=r"(__ptr) : "0"((typeof(*(&(slab_lock))) *)(&(slab_lock)))); (typeof((typeof(*(&(slab_lock))) *)(&(slab_lock)))) (__ptr + (((__per_cpu_offset[__cpu])))); }); })).lock)->rlock){..-...}, at: [<ffffffff811164cc>] __local_lock_irq+0x16/0x61
#1: (&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff8111844e>] __cache_free+0x325/0x3ea
stack backtrace:
Pid: 124, comm: udevd Not tainted 3.0.0-rc3+ #37
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff81081e3d>] __lock_acquire+0x9ae/0xdc8
[<ffffffff8107f289>] ? look_up_lock_class+0x5f/0xbe
[<ffffffff810812e4>] ? mark_lock+0x2d/0x1d8
[<ffffffff81119619>] ? ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff81082774>] lock_acquire+0x103/0x12e
[<ffffffff81119619>] ? ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff8107f6b9>] ? register_lock_class+0x1e/0x2ca
[<ffffffff81247054>] ? __debug_object_init+0x43/0x2e7
[<ffffffff814a7730>] _raw_spin_lock+0x3b/0x4a
[<ffffffff81119619>] ? ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff81119619>] ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff8107f6b9>] ? register_lock_class+0x1e/0x2ca
[<ffffffff81247054>] ? __debug_object_init+0x43/0x2e7
[<ffffffff8111b0d5>] kmem_cache_alloc+0xc5/0x1fb
[<ffffffff81247054>] __debug_object_init+0x43/0x2e7
[<ffffffff8124735f>] ? debug_object_activate+0x38/0xdc
[<ffffffff810812e4>] ? mark_lock+0x2d/0x1d8
[<ffffffff8124730c>] debug_object_init+0x14/0x16
[<ffffffff8106bd26>] rcuhead_fixup_activate+0x2b/0xbc
[<ffffffff81246d6f>] debug_object_fixup+0x1e/0x2b
[<ffffffff812473f6>] debug_object_activate+0xcf/0xdc
[<ffffffff81118b93>] ? kmem_cache_shrink+0x68/0x68
[<ffffffff810b1fc0>] __call_rcu+0x4f/0x19e
[<ffffffff810b2124>] call_rcu+0x15/0x17
[<ffffffff81117c4a>] slab_destroy+0x11f/0x157
[<ffffffff81117dd4>] free_block+0x152/0x18d
[<ffffffff81118497>] __cache_free+0x36e/0x3ea
[<ffffffff81103b3b>] ? anon_vma_free+0x3d/0x41
[<ffffffff811164cc>] ? __local_lock_irq+0x16/0x61
[<ffffffff81117aad>] kmem_cache_free+0xa1/0x11f
[<ffffffff81103b3b>] anon_vma_free+0x3d/0x41
[<ffffffff81104a77>] __put_anon_vma+0x38/0x3d
[<ffffffff81104aa5>] put_anon_vma+0x29/0x2d
[<ffffffff81104b7e>] unlink_anon_vmas+0x72/0xa5
[<ffffffff810faa5b>] free_pgtables+0x6c/0xcb
[<ffffffff81100c96>] exit_mmap+0xc0/0xf7
[<ffffffff8104de1d>] mmput+0x60/0xd3
[<ffffffff81054112>] exit_mm+0x141/0x14e
[<ffffffff814a7d75>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x54/0x61
[<ffffffff8105436a>] do_exit+0x24b/0x74f
[<ffffffff811289ae>] ? fput+0x1d4/0x1e3
[<ffffffff8107f539>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x33/0x90
[<ffffffff814a847d>] ? retint_swapgs+0x13/0x1b
[<ffffffff81054ae2>] do_group_exit+0x82/0xad
[<ffffffff81054b24>] sys_exit_group+0x17/0x1b
[<ffffffff814ae182>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: slab vs lockdep vs debugobjects
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:48:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1308592080.26237.114.camel@twins> (raw)
Hi Pekka,
Thomas found a fun lockdep splat, see below. Basically call_rcu() can
end up in kmem_cache_alloc(), and call_rcu() is used under
l3->list_lock, causing the splat. Since the debug kmem_cache isn't
SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU this shouldn't ever actually recurse.
Now, since this particular kmem_cache is created with
SLAB_DEBUG_OBJECTS, we thought it might be easy enough to set a separate
lockdep class for its l3->list_lock's.
However I found that the existing lockdep annotation is for kmalloc only
-- don't custom kmem_caches use OFF_SLAB?
Anyway, I got lost in slab (again), but would it make sense to move all
lockdep fixups into kmem_list3_init() or thereabouts?
---
=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
3.0.0-rc3+ #37
---------------------------------------------
udevd/124 is trying to acquire lock:
(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff81119619>] ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
but task is already holding lock:
(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff8111844e>] __cache_free+0x325/0x3ea
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock);
lock(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
2 locks held by udevd/124:
#0: (&(&(*({ do { const void *__vpp_verify = (typeof((&(slab_lock))))((void *)0); (void)__vpp_verify; } while (0); ({ unsigned long __ptr; __asm__ ("" : "=r"(__ptr) : "0"((typeof(*(&(slab_lock))) *)(&(slab_lock)))); (typeof((typeof(*(&(slab_lock))) *)(&(slab_lock)))) (__ptr + (((__per_cpu_offset[__cpu])))); }); })).lock)->rlock){..-...}, at: [<ffffffff811164cc>] __local_lock_irq+0x16/0x61
#1: (&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff8111844e>] __cache_free+0x325/0x3ea
stack backtrace:
Pid: 124, comm: udevd Not tainted 3.0.0-rc3+ #37
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff81081e3d>] __lock_acquire+0x9ae/0xdc8
[<ffffffff8107f289>] ? look_up_lock_class+0x5f/0xbe
[<ffffffff810812e4>] ? mark_lock+0x2d/0x1d8
[<ffffffff81119619>] ? ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff81082774>] lock_acquire+0x103/0x12e
[<ffffffff81119619>] ? ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff8107f6b9>] ? register_lock_class+0x1e/0x2ca
[<ffffffff81247054>] ? __debug_object_init+0x43/0x2e7
[<ffffffff814a7730>] _raw_spin_lock+0x3b/0x4a
[<ffffffff81119619>] ? ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff81119619>] ____cache_alloc+0xc9/0x323
[<ffffffff8107f6b9>] ? register_lock_class+0x1e/0x2ca
[<ffffffff81247054>] ? __debug_object_init+0x43/0x2e7
[<ffffffff8111b0d5>] kmem_cache_alloc+0xc5/0x1fb
[<ffffffff81247054>] __debug_object_init+0x43/0x2e7
[<ffffffff8124735f>] ? debug_object_activate+0x38/0xdc
[<ffffffff810812e4>] ? mark_lock+0x2d/0x1d8
[<ffffffff8124730c>] debug_object_init+0x14/0x16
[<ffffffff8106bd26>] rcuhead_fixup_activate+0x2b/0xbc
[<ffffffff81246d6f>] debug_object_fixup+0x1e/0x2b
[<ffffffff812473f6>] debug_object_activate+0xcf/0xdc
[<ffffffff81118b93>] ? kmem_cache_shrink+0x68/0x68
[<ffffffff810b1fc0>] __call_rcu+0x4f/0x19e
[<ffffffff810b2124>] call_rcu+0x15/0x17
[<ffffffff81117c4a>] slab_destroy+0x11f/0x157
[<ffffffff81117dd4>] free_block+0x152/0x18d
[<ffffffff81118497>] __cache_free+0x36e/0x3ea
[<ffffffff81103b3b>] ? anon_vma_free+0x3d/0x41
[<ffffffff811164cc>] ? __local_lock_irq+0x16/0x61
[<ffffffff81117aad>] kmem_cache_free+0xa1/0x11f
[<ffffffff81103b3b>] anon_vma_free+0x3d/0x41
[<ffffffff81104a77>] __put_anon_vma+0x38/0x3d
[<ffffffff81104aa5>] put_anon_vma+0x29/0x2d
[<ffffffff81104b7e>] unlink_anon_vmas+0x72/0xa5
[<ffffffff810faa5b>] free_pgtables+0x6c/0xcb
[<ffffffff81100c96>] exit_mmap+0xc0/0xf7
[<ffffffff8104de1d>] mmput+0x60/0xd3
[<ffffffff81054112>] exit_mm+0x141/0x14e
[<ffffffff814a7d75>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x54/0x61
[<ffffffff8105436a>] do_exit+0x24b/0x74f
[<ffffffff811289ae>] ? fput+0x1d4/0x1e3
[<ffffffff8107f539>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x33/0x90
[<ffffffff814a847d>] ? retint_swapgs+0x13/0x1b
[<ffffffff81054ae2>] do_group_exit+0x82/0xad
[<ffffffff81054b24>] sys_exit_group+0x17/0x1b
[<ffffffff814ae182>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2011-06-20 17:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-20 17:48 Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2011-06-20 17:48 ` slab vs lockdep vs debugobjects Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-22 7:02 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-06-22 7:02 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-06-26 20:04 ` Maciej Rutecki
2011-06-26 20:04 ` Maciej Rutecki
2011-06-26 21:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-26 21:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-28 18:22 ` Maciej Rutecki
2011-06-28 18:22 ` Maciej Rutecki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1308592080.26237.114.camel@twins \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.