From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "mm/slub.c: run free_partial() outside of the kmem_cache_node->list_lock" has been added to the 4.7-stable tree
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 10:53:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <14725472021141@kroah.com> (raw)
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
mm/slub.c: run free_partial() outside of the kmem_cache_node->list_lock
to the 4.7-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
mm-slub.c-run-free_partial-outside-of-the-kmem_cache_node-list_lock.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.7 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
>From 6039892396d845b18228935561960441900cffca Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 16:27:58 -0700
Subject: mm/slub.c: run free_partial() outside of the kmem_cache_node->list_lock
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
commit 6039892396d845b18228935561960441900cffca upstream.
With debugobjects enabled and using SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, when a
kmem_cache_node is destroyed the call_rcu() may trigger a slab
allocation to fill the debug object pool (__debug_object_init:fill_pool).
Everywhere but during kmem_cache_destroy(), discard_slab() is performed
outside of the kmem_cache_node->list_lock and avoids a lockdep warning
about potential recursion:
=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
4.8.0-rc1-gfxbench+ #1 Tainted: G U
---------------------------------------------
rmmod/8895 is trying to acquire lock:
(&(&n->list_lock)->rlock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff811c80d7>] get_partial_node.isra.63+0x47/0x430
but task is already holding lock:
(&(&n->list_lock)->rlock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff811cbda4>] __kmem_cache_shutdown+0x54/0x320
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&(&n->list_lock)->rlock);
lock(&(&n->list_lock)->rlock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
5 locks held by rmmod/8895:
#0: (&dev->mutex){......}, at: driver_detach+0x42/0xc0
#1: (&dev->mutex){......}, at: driver_detach+0x50/0xc0
#2: (cpu_hotplug.dep_map){++++++}, at: get_online_cpus+0x2d/0x80
#3: (slab_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: kmem_cache_destroy+0x3c/0x220
#4: (&(&n->list_lock)->rlock){-.-...}, at: __kmem_cache_shutdown+0x54/0x320
stack backtrace:
CPU: 6 PID: 8895 Comm: rmmod Tainted: G U 4.8.0-rc1-gfxbench+ #1
Hardware name: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. H87M-D3H/H87M-D3H, BIOS F11 08/18/2015
Call Trace:
__lock_acquire+0x1646/0x1ad0
lock_acquire+0xb2/0x200
_raw_spin_lock+0x36/0x50
get_partial_node.isra.63+0x47/0x430
___slab_alloc.constprop.67+0x1a7/0x3b0
__slab_alloc.isra.64.constprop.66+0x43/0x80
kmem_cache_alloc+0x236/0x2d0
__debug_object_init+0x2de/0x400
debug_object_activate+0x109/0x1e0
__call_rcu.constprop.63+0x32/0x2f0
call_rcu+0x12/0x20
discard_slab+0x3d/0x40
__kmem_cache_shutdown+0xdb/0x320
shutdown_cache+0x19/0x60
kmem_cache_destroy+0x1ae/0x220
i915_gem_load_cleanup+0x14/0x40 [i915]
i915_driver_unload+0x151/0x180 [i915]
i915_pci_remove+0x14/0x20 [i915]
pci_device_remove+0x34/0xb0
__device_release_driver+0x95/0x140
driver_detach+0xb6/0xc0
bus_remove_driver+0x53/0xd0
driver_unregister+0x27/0x50
pci_unregister_driver+0x25/0x70
i915_exit+0x1a/0x1e2 [i915]
SyS_delete_module+0x193/0x1f0
entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xac
Fixes: 52b4b950b507 ("mm: slab: free kmem_cache_node after destroy sysfs file")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1470759070-18743-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
Reported-by: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
mm/slub.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/mm/slub.c
+++ b/mm/slub.c
@@ -3479,6 +3479,7 @@ static void list_slab_objects(struct kme
*/
static void free_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, struct kmem_cache_node *n)
{
+ LIST_HEAD(discard);
struct page *page, *h;
BUG_ON(irqs_disabled());
@@ -3486,13 +3487,16 @@ static void free_partial(struct kmem_cac
list_for_each_entry_safe(page, h, &n->partial, lru) {
if (!page->inuse) {
remove_partial(n, page);
- discard_slab(s, page);
+ list_add(&page->lru, &discard);
} else {
list_slab_objects(s, page,
"Objects remaining in %s on __kmem_cache_shutdown()");
}
}
spin_unlock_irq(&n->list_lock);
+
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(page, h, &discard, lru)
+ discard_slab(s, page);
}
/*
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from chris@chris-wilson.co.uk are
queue-4.7/mm-slub.c-run-free_partial-outside-of-the-kmem_cache_node-list_lock.patch
reply other threads:[~2016-08-30 8:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=14725472021141@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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.