Re: Long delays creating a netns after deleting one (possibly RCU related)

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 09:37:47AM -0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> (Cc'ing Paul)
> 
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Rolf Neugebauer
> <rolf.neugebauer@docker.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > We noticed some long delays starting docker containers on some newer
> > kernels (starting with 4.5.x and still present in 4.9-rc4, 4.4.x is
> > fine). We narrowed this down to the creation of a network namespace
> > being delayed directly after removing another one (details and
> > reproduction below). We have seen delays of up to 60s on some systems.
> >
> > - The delay is proportional to the number of CPUs (online or offline).
> > We first discovered it with a Hyper-V Linux VM. Hyper-V advertises up
> > to 240 offline vCPUs even if one configures the VM with only, say 2
> > vCPUs. We see linear increase in delay when we change NR_CPUS in the
> > kernel config.
> >
> > - The delay is also dependent on some tunnel network interfaces being
> > present (which we had compiled in in one of our kernel configs).
> >
> > - We can reproduce this issue with stock kernels from
> > http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/running in Hyper-V VMs
> > as well as other hypervisors like qemu and hyperkit where we have good
> > control over the number of CPUs.
> >
> > A simple test is:
> > modprobe ipip
> > moprobe  ip_gre
> > modprobe ip_vti
> > echo -n "add netns foo ===> "; /usr/bin/time -f "%E" ip netns add foo
> > echo -n "del netns foo ===> "; /usr/bin/time -f "%E" ip netns delete foo
> > echo -n "add netns bar ===> "; /usr/bin/time -f "%E" ip netns add bar
> > echo -n "del netns bar ===> "; /usr/bin/time -f "%E" ip netns delete bar
> >
> > with an output like:
> > add netns foo ===> 0:00.00
> > del netns foo ===> 0:00.01
> > add netns bar ===> 0:08.53
> > del netns bar ===> 0:00.01
> >
> > This is on a 4.9-rc4 kernel from the above URL configured with
> > NR_CPUS=256 running in a Hyper-V VM (kernel config attached).
> >
> > Below is a dump of the work queues while the second 'ip add netns' is
> > hanging. The state of the work queues does not seem to change while
> > the command is delayed and the pattern shown is consistent across
> > different kernel versions.
> >
> > Is this a known issue and/or is someone working on a fix?
> 
> Not to me.
> 
> 
> >
> > [  610.356272] sysrq: SysRq : Show Blocked State
> > [  610.356742]   task                        PC stack   pid father
> > [  610.357252] kworker/u480:1  D    0  1994      2 0x00000000
> > [  610.357752] Workqueue: netns cleanup_net
> > [  610.358239]  ffff9892f1065800 0000000000000000 ffff9892ee1e1e00
> > ffff9892f8e59340
> > [  610.358705]  ffff9892f4526900 ffffbf0104b5ba88 ffffffffbe486df3
> > ffffbf0104b5ba60
> > [  610.359168]  00ffffffbdcbe663 ffff9892f8e59340 0000000100012e70
> > ffff9892ee1e1e00
> > [  610.359677] Call Trace:
> > [  610.360169]  [<ffffffffbe486df3>] ? __schedule+0x233/0x6e0
> > [  610.360723]  [<ffffffffbe4872d6>] schedule+0x36/0x80
> > [  610.361194]  [<ffffffffbe48a9ca>] schedule_timeout+0x22a/0x3f0
> > [  610.361789]  [<ffffffffbe486dfb>] ? __schedule+0x23b/0x6e0
> > [  610.362260]  [<ffffffffbe487d24>] wait_for_completion+0xb4/0x140
> > [  610.362736]  [<ffffffffbdcb05a0>] ? wake_up_q+0x80/0x80
> > [  610.363306]  [<ffffffffbdceb528>] __wait_rcu_gp+0xc8/0xf0
> > [  610.363782]  [<ffffffffbdceea5c>] synchronize_sched+0x5c/0x80
> > [  610.364137]  [<ffffffffbdcf0010>] ? call_rcu_bh+0x20/0x20
> > [  610.364742]  [<ffffffffbdceb440>] ?
> > trace_raw_output_rcu_utilization+0x60/0x60
> > [  610.365337]  [<ffffffffbe3696bc>] synchronize_net+0x1c/0x30
> 
> This is a worker which holds the net_mutex and is waiting for
> a RCU grace period to elapse.
> 
> 
> > [  610.365846]  [<ffffffffbe369803>] netif_napi_del+0x23/0x80
> > [  610.367494]  [<ffffffffc057f6f8>] ip_tunnel_dev_free+0x68/0xf0 [ip_tunnel]
> > [  610.368007]  [<ffffffffbe372c10>] netdev_run_todo+0x230/0x330
> > [  610.368454]  [<ffffffffbe37eb4e>] rtnl_unlock+0xe/0x10
> > [  610.369001]  [<ffffffffc057f4df>] ip_tunnel_delete_net+0xdf/0x120 [ip_tunnel]
> > [  610.369500]  [<ffffffffc058b92c>] ipip_exit_net+0x2c/0x30 [ipip]
> > [  610.369997]  [<ffffffffbe362688>] ops_exit_list.isra.4+0x38/0x60
> > [  610.370636]  [<ffffffffbe363674>] cleanup_net+0x1c4/0x2b0
> > [  610.371130]  [<ffffffffbdc9e4ac>] process_one_work+0x1fc/0x4b0
> > [  610.371812]  [<ffffffffbdc9e7ab>] worker_thread+0x4b/0x500
> > [  610.373074]  [<ffffffffbdc9e760>] ? process_one_work+0x4b0/0x4b0
> > [  610.373622]  [<ffffffffbdc9e760>] ? process_one_work+0x4b0/0x4b0
> > [  610.374100]  [<ffffffffbdca4b09>] kthread+0xd9/0xf0
> > [  610.374574]  [<ffffffffbdca4a30>] ? kthread_park+0x60/0x60
> > [  610.375198]  [<ffffffffbe48c2b5>] ret_from_fork+0x25/0x30
> > [  610.375678] ip              D    0  2149   2148 0x00000000
> > [  610.376185]  ffff9892f0a99000 0000000000000000 ffff9892f0a66900
> > [  610.376185]  ffff9892f8e59340
> > [  610.376185]  ffff9892f4526900 ffffbf0101173db8 ffffffffbe486df3
> > [  610.376753]  00000005fecffd76
> > [  610.376762]  00ff9892f11d9820 ffff9892f8e59340 ffff989200000000
> > ffff9892f0a66900
> > [  610.377274] Call Trace:
> > [  610.377789]  [<ffffffffbe486df3>] ? __schedule+0x233/0x6e0
> > [  610.378306]  [<ffffffffbe4872d6>] schedule+0x36/0x80
> > [  610.378992]  [<ffffffffbe48756e>] schedule_preempt_disabled+0xe/0x10
> > [  610.379514]  [<ffffffffbe489199>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0xb9/0x130
> > [  610.380031]  [<ffffffffbde0fce2>] ? __kmalloc+0x162/0x1e0
> > [  610.380556]  [<ffffffffbe48922f>] mutex_lock+0x1f/0x30
> > [  610.381135]  [<ffffffffbe3637ff>] copy_net_ns+0x9f/0x170
> > [  610.381647]  [<ffffffffbdca5e6b>] create_new_namespaces+0x11b/0x200
> > [  610.382249]  [<ffffffffbdca60fa>] unshare_nsproxy_namespaces+0x5a/0xb0
> > [  610.382818]  [<ffffffffbdc82dcd>] SyS_unshare+0x1cd/0x360
> > [  610.383319]  [<ffffffffbe48c03b>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1e/0xad
> 
> This process is apparently waiting for the net_mutex held by the previous one.
> 
> Either RCU implementation is broken or something else is missing.
> Do you have more stack traces of related processes? For example,
> rcu_tasks_kthread. And if anything you can help to narrow down the problem,
> it would be great.

Did you set the rcu_normal boot parameter?  Doing so would have this effect.

(It is intended for real-time users who don't like expedited grace periods.)

							Thanx, Paul