From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: cpu stopper threads and load balancing leads to deadlock
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 07:39:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180503143941.GH26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180503135617.GC12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:56:17PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:32:39PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > Dang. With $subject fix applied as well..
>
> That's a NO then... :-(
>
> > [ 151.103732] smpboot: Booting Node 0 Processor 2 APIC 0x4
> > [ 151.104908] =============================
> > [ 151.104909] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> > [ 151.104910] 4.17.0.g66d489e-tip-default #84 Tainted: G E
> > [ 151.104911] -----------------------------
> > [ 151.104912] kernel/sched/core.c:1625 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> > [ 151.104913]
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > [ 151.104914]
> > RCU used illegally from offline CPU!
> > rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 0
> > [ 151.104916] 3 locks held by swapper/2/0:
> > [ 151.104916] #0: 00000000560adb60 (stop_cpus_mutex){+.+.}, at: stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu+0x86/0x140
> > [ 151.104923] #1: 00000000e4fb0238 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}, at: try_to_wake_up+0x2d/0x5f0
> > [ 151.104929] #2: 000000003341403b (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rcu_read_lock+0x0/0x80
> > [ 151.104934]
> > stack backtrace:
> > [ 151.104937] CPU: 2 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/2 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G E 4.17.0.g66d489e-tip-default #84
> > [ 151.104938] Hardware name: MEDION MS-7848/MS-7848, BIOS M7848W08.20C 09/23/2013
> > [ 151.104938] Call Trace:
> > [ 151.104942] dump_stack+0x78/0xb3
> > [ 151.104945] ttwu_stat+0x121/0x130
> > [ 151.104949] try_to_wake_up+0x2c2/0x5f0
> > [ 151.104953] ? cpu_stop_park+0x30/0x30
> > [ 151.104956] wake_up_q+0x4a/0x70
> > [ 151.104959] cpu_stop_queue_work+0x6b/0xa0
> > [ 151.104963] queue_stop_cpus_work+0x61/0xb0
> > [ 151.104968] stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu+0xd8/0x140
>
> > > diff --git a/kernel/stop_machine.c b/kernel/stop_machine.c
> > > index f89014a2c238..a32518c2ba4a 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/stop_machine.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/stop_machine.c
> > > @@ -650,8 +650,10 @@ int stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu(cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *data,
> > > /* Schedule work on other CPUs and execute directly for local CPU */
> > > set_state(&msdata, MULTI_STOP_PREPARE);
> > > cpu_stop_init_done(&done, num_active_cpus());
> > > - queue_stop_cpus_work(cpu_active_mask, multi_cpu_stop, &msdata,
> > > - &done);
> > > +
> > > + RCU_NONIDLE(queue_stop_cpus_work(cpu_active_mask, multi_cpu_stop,
> > > + &msdata, &done));
> > > +
> > > ret = multi_cpu_stop(&msdata);
>
> Paul, any clue on what else to try here? The whole MTRR setup is
> radically crazy but it's something we're stuck with (yay hardware) :/
>
> So the issue is that we're doing wakeups from an offline CPU (very early
> during bringup) and RCU (rightfully) complains about that. I thought
> RCU_NONIDLE() was the magic incantation that makes RCU 'watch', but
> clearly it's not enough here.
Huh.
No, RCU_NONIDLE() only works for idle, not for offline.
Maybe... Let me take a look. There must be some way to mark a
specific lock acquisition and release as being lockdep-invisible...
Another approach would be to have an architecture-specific thing that
caused RCU to be enabled way earlier on x86.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-03 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-17 14:21 cpu stopper threads and load balancing leads to deadlock Matt Fleming
2018-04-18 5:47 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-04-19 5:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-04-20 9:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-24 13:33 ` Matt Fleming
2018-05-03 12:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 12:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 12:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 13:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 13:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 14:16 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-03 14:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-03 16:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 17:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-03 17:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 18:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-04 3:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-15 4:30 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-17 14:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-17 14:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-05-17 14:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-17 14:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-22 17:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-03 14:39 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-05-03 14:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-03 9:24 ` [tip:sched/urgent] stop_machine, sched: Fix migrate_swap() vs. active_balance() deadlock tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
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=20180503143941.GH26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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.