All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: io-uring <io-uring@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io-wq: remove GFP_ATOMIC allocation off schedule out path
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 11:17:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210805091741.GB22037@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a673a130-e0e4-5aa8-4165-f35d1262fc6a@kernel.dk>

On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 08:43:43AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Daniel reports that the v5.14-rc4-rt4 kernel throws a BUG when running
> stress-ng:
> 
> | [   90.202543] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:35
> | [   90.202549] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, non_block: 0, pid: 2047, name: iou-wrk-2041
> | [   90.202555] CPU: 5 PID: 2047 Comm: iou-wrk-2041 Tainted: G        W         5.14.0-rc4-rt4+ #89
> | [   90.202559] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.14.0-2 04/01/2014
> | [   90.202561] Call Trace:
> | [   90.202577]  dump_stack_lvl+0x34/0x44
> | [   90.202584]  ___might_sleep.cold+0x87/0x94
> | [   90.202588]  rt_spin_lock+0x19/0x70
> | [   90.202593]  ___slab_alloc+0xcb/0x7d0
> | [   90.202598]  ? newidle_balance.constprop.0+0xf5/0x3b0
> | [   90.202603]  ? dequeue_entity+0xc3/0x290
> | [   90.202605]  ? io_wqe_dec_running.isra.0+0x98/0xe0
> | [   90.202610]  ? pick_next_task_fair+0xb9/0x330
> | [   90.202612]  ? __schedule+0x670/0x1410
> | [   90.202615]  ? io_wqe_dec_running.isra.0+0x98/0xe0
> | [   90.202618]  kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x79/0x1f0
> | [   90.202621]  io_wqe_dec_running.isra.0+0x98/0xe0
> | [   90.202625]  io_wq_worker_sleeping+0x37/0x50
> | [   90.202628]  schedule+0x30/0xd0
> | [   90.202630]  schedule_timeout+0x8f/0x1a0
> | [   90.202634]  ? __bpf_trace_tick_stop+0x10/0x10
> | [   90.202637]  io_wqe_worker+0xfd/0x320
> | [   90.202641]  ? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0xd3/0x290
> | [   90.202644]  ? io_worker_handle_work+0x670/0x670
> | [   90.202646]  ? io_worker_handle_work+0x670/0x670
> | [   90.202649]  ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
> 
> which is due to the RT kernel not liking a GFP_ATOMIC allocation inside
> a raw spinlock. Besides that not working on RT, doing any kind of
> allocation from inside schedule() is kind of nasty and should be avoided
> if at all possible.
> 
> This particular path happens when an io-wq worker goes to sleep, and we
> need a new worker to handle pending work. We currently allocate a small
> data item to hold the information we need to create a new worker, but we
> can instead include this data in the io_worker struct itself and just
> protect it with a single bit lock. We only really need one per worker
> anyway, as we will have run pending work between to sleep cycles.
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210804082418.fbibprcwtzyt5qax@beryllium.lan/
> Reported-by: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>

Thanks!

Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-08-05  9:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-04 14:43 [PATCH] io-wq: remove GFP_ATOMIC allocation off schedule out path Jens Axboe
2021-08-04 15:33 ` Daniel Wagner
2021-08-04 15:39   ` Jens Axboe
2021-08-05  9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-08-10  7:40 [ANNOUNCE] v5.14-rc4-rt4 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-08-10 11:22 ` [PATCH] io-wq: remove GFP_ATOMIC allocation off schedule out path kernel test robot
2021-08-10 11:22   ` kernel test robot
2021-08-10 15:22 ` kernel test robot
2021-08-10 15:22   ` kernel test robot

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=20210805091741.GB22037@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dwagner@suse.de \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    --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.