From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Sesterhenn <eric.sesterhenn@lsexperts.de>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RCU callbacks and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:26:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090916232609.GK6737@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1253143186.9006.0.camel@queen>
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:19:46AM +0200, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 08:57 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 08:47:16AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 04:34:15PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 08:29 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 03:17:21PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > > > When TREE_PREEMPT_RCU is enabled, the rcu list traversing above fails
> > > > > > with access to 0x6b6b6b6b but it is fine with TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=n and
> > > > > > TREE_RCU=y. During clean-up, kmemleak objects should no longer be freed
> > > > > > by other means since kmemleak was disabled and all callbacks are
> > > > > > ignored. The system is a 900Mhz P3, 256MB RAM, CONFIG_SMP=n.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is there something I'm doing wrong in kmemleak or a bug with RCU
> > > > > > preemption? The kernel oops looks like this:
> > > > >
> > > > > From your description and the code above, I must suspect a bug with
> > > > > RCU preemption. A new one, as the only bugs I am currently chasing
> > > > > involve NR_CPUS>32 (>64 on 64-bit systems).
> > > > >
> > > > > CONFIG_SMP=n implies NR_CPUS==1 in your build, correct?
> > > >
> > > > CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1.
> > >
> > > I was afraid of that. ;-)
> >
> > PS to previous -- there -is- a bug in mainline for TREE_PREEMPT_RCU for
> > single-CPU operation, but it is with synchronize_rcu() rather than
> > call_rcu(). The fix is in tip/core/urgent, commit #366b04ca. Or see
> > the following patch.
> >
> > So, could you please give the following patch a try?
>
> Sadly this does not fix the issue, is there any further information I
> can provide to you?
:-(
Would you be willing to give the attached diagnostic patch a go?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
index 2454999..211442c 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
@@ -623,8 +623,8 @@ rcu_start_gp(struct rcu_state *rsp, unsigned long flags)
/* Special-case the common single-level case. */
if (NUM_RCU_NODES == 1) {
- rnp->qsmask = rnp->qsmaskinit;
rcu_preempt_check_blocked_tasks(rnp);
+ rnp->qsmask = rnp->qsmaskinit;
rnp->gpnum = rsp->gpnum;
rsp->signaled = RCU_SIGNAL_INIT; /* force_quiescent_state OK. */
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
@@ -657,8 +657,8 @@ rcu_start_gp(struct rcu_state *rsp, unsigned long flags)
rnp_end = &rsp->node[NUM_RCU_NODES];
for (rnp_cur = &rsp->node[0]; rnp_cur < rnp_end; rnp_cur++) {
spin_lock(&rnp_cur->lock); /* irqs already disabled. */
- rnp_cur->qsmask = rnp_cur->qsmaskinit;
rcu_preempt_check_blocked_tasks(rnp);
+ rnp_cur->qsmask = rnp_cur->qsmaskinit;
rnp->gpnum = rsp->gpnum;
spin_unlock(&rnp_cur->lock); /* irqs already disabled. */
}
@@ -703,6 +703,7 @@ rcu_process_gp_end(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_data *rdp)
static void cpu_quiet_msk_finish(struct rcu_state *rsp, unsigned long flags)
__releases(rnp->lock)
{
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(rsp->completed == rsp->gpnum);
rsp->completed = rsp->gpnum;
rcu_process_gp_end(rsp, rsp->rda[smp_processor_id()]);
rcu_start_gp(rsp, flags); /* releases root node's rnp->lock. */
@@ -720,6 +721,8 @@ cpu_quiet_msk(unsigned long mask, struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
unsigned long flags)
__releases(rnp->lock)
{
+ struct rcu_node *rnp_c;
+
/* Walk up the rcu_node hierarchy. */
for (;;) {
if (!(rnp->qsmask & mask)) {
@@ -743,8 +746,10 @@ cpu_quiet_msk(unsigned long mask, struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
break;
}
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
+ rnp_c = rnp;
rnp = rnp->parent;
spin_lock_irqsave(&rnp->lock, flags);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(rnp_c->qsmask);
}
/*
@@ -853,7 +858,7 @@ static void __rcu_offline_cpu(int cpu, struct rcu_state *rsp)
spin_lock_irqsave(&rsp->onofflock, flags);
/* Remove the outgoing CPU from the masks in the rcu_node hierarchy. */
- rnp = rdp->mynode;
+ rnp = rdp->mynode; /* this is the outgoing CPU's rnp. */
mask = rdp->grpmask; /* rnp->grplo is constant. */
do {
spin_lock(&rnp->lock); /* irqs already disabled. */
@@ -862,7 +867,7 @@ static void __rcu_offline_cpu(int cpu, struct rcu_state *rsp)
spin_unlock(&rnp->lock); /* irqs remain disabled. */
break;
}
- rcu_preempt_offline_tasks(rsp, rnp);
+ rcu_preempt_offline_tasks(rsp, rnp, rdp);
mask = rnp->grpmask;
spin_unlock(&rnp->lock); /* irqs remain disabled. */
rnp = rnp->parent;
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
index eb4bae3..2b996c3 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
@@ -206,7 +206,8 @@ static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
*/
if (!empty && rnp->qsmask == 0 &&
list_empty(&rnp->blocked_tasks[rnp->gpnum & 0x1])) {
- t->rcu_read_unlock_special &= ~RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS;
+ struct rcu_node *rnp_p;
+
if (rnp->parent == NULL) {
/* Only one rcu_node in the tree. */
cpu_quiet_msk_finish(&rcu_preempt_state, flags);
@@ -215,9 +216,10 @@ static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
/* Report up the rest of the hierarchy. */
mask = rnp->grpmask;
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
- rnp = rnp->parent;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&rnp->lock, flags);
- cpu_quiet_msk(mask, &rcu_preempt_state, rnp, flags);
+ rnp_p = rnp->parent;
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&rnp_p->lock, flags);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(rnp->qsmask);
+ cpu_quiet_msk(mask, &rcu_preempt_state, rnp_p, flags);
return;
}
spin_unlock(&rnp->lock);
@@ -278,6 +280,7 @@ static void rcu_print_task_stall(struct rcu_node *rnp)
static void rcu_preempt_check_blocked_tasks(struct rcu_node *rnp)
{
WARN_ON_ONCE(!list_empty(&rnp->blocked_tasks[rnp->gpnum & 0x1]));
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(rnp->qsmask);
}
/*
@@ -302,7 +305,8 @@ static int rcu_preempted_readers(struct rcu_node *rnp)
* The caller must hold rnp->lock with irqs disabled.
*/
static void rcu_preempt_offline_tasks(struct rcu_state *rsp,
- struct rcu_node *rnp)
+ struct rcu_node *rnp,
+ struct rcu_data *rdp)
{
int i;
struct list_head *lp;
@@ -314,6 +318,9 @@ static void rcu_preempt_offline_tasks(struct rcu_state *rsp,
WARN_ONCE(1, "Last CPU thought to be offlined?");
return; /* Shouldn't happen: at least one CPU online. */
}
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(rnp != rdp->mynode &&
+ (!list_empty(&rnp->blocked_tasks[0]) ||
+ !list_empty(&rnp->blocked_tasks[1])));
/*
* Move tasks up to root rcu_node. Rely on the fact that the
@@ -489,7 +496,8 @@ static int rcu_preempted_readers(struct rcu_node *rnp)
* tasks that were blocked within RCU read-side critical sections.
*/
static void rcu_preempt_offline_tasks(struct rcu_state *rsp,
- struct rcu_node *rnp)
+ struct rcu_node *rnp,
+ struct rcu_data *rdp)
{
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-16 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-16 14:17 RCU callbacks and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU Catalin Marinas
2009-09-16 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-09-16 15:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2009-09-16 15:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-09-16 15:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-09-16 16:00 ` Eric Sesterhenn
2009-09-16 23:19 ` Eric Sesterhenn
2009-09-16 23:26 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2009-09-17 8:29 ` Eric Sesterhenn
2009-09-17 22:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-09-18 12:12 ` Eric Sesterhenn
2009-09-18 12:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20090916232609.GK6737@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=eric.sesterhenn@lsexperts.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@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.