From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
songmuchun@bytedance.com, shakeelb@google.com,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, mhocko@suse.com, leitao@debian.org,
josef@toxicpanda.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: [merged mm-hotfixes-stable] mm-memcontrol-fix-gfp_nofs-recursion-in-memoryhigh-enforcement.patch removed from -mm tree
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 13:22:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230919202213.21CD0C433C9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
The quilt patch titled
Subject: mm: memcontrol: fix GFP_NOFS recursion in memory.high enforcement
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
mm-memcontrol-fix-gfp_nofs-recursion-in-memoryhigh-enforcement.patch
This patch was dropped because it was merged into the mm-hotfixes-stable branch
of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
------------------------------------------------------
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: mm: memcontrol: fix GFP_NOFS recursion in memory.high enforcement
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 11:21:39 -0400
Breno and Josef report a deadlock scenario from cgroup reclaim
re-entering the filesystem:
[ 361.546690] ======================================================
[ 361.559210] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 361.571703] 6.5.0-0_fbk700_debug_rc0_kbuilder_13159_gbf787a128001 #1 Tainted: G S E
[ 361.589704] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 361.602277] find/9315 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 361.611625] ffff88837ba140c0 (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x68/0x4f0
[ 361.631437]
[ 361.631437] but task is already holding lock:
[ 361.643243] ffff8881765b8678 (btrfs-tree-01){++++}-{4:4}, at: btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x1e/0x40
[ 362.904457] mutex_lock_nested+0x1c/0x30
[ 362.912414] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x68/0x4f0
[ 362.922460] btrfs_evict_inode+0x301/0x770
[ 362.982726] evict+0x17c/0x380
[ 362.988944] prune_icache_sb+0x100/0x1d0
[ 363.005559] super_cache_scan+0x1f8/0x260
[ 363.013695] do_shrink_slab+0x2a2/0x540
[ 363.021489] shrink_slab_memcg+0x237/0x3d0
[ 363.050606] shrink_slab+0xa7/0x240
[ 363.083382] shrink_node_memcgs+0x262/0x3b0
[ 363.091870] shrink_node+0x1a4/0x720
[ 363.099150] shrink_zones+0x1f6/0x5d0
[ 363.148798] do_try_to_free_pages+0x19b/0x5e0
[ 363.157633] try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages+0x266/0x370
[ 363.190575] reclaim_high+0x16f/0x1f0
[ 363.208409] mem_cgroup_handle_over_high+0x10b/0x270
[ 363.246678] try_charge_memcg+0xaf2/0xc70
[ 363.304151] charge_memcg+0xf0/0x350
[ 363.320070] __mem_cgroup_charge+0x28/0x40
[ 363.328371] __filemap_add_folio+0x870/0xd50
[ 363.371303] filemap_add_folio+0xdd/0x310
[ 363.399696] __filemap_get_folio+0x2fc/0x7d0
[ 363.419086] pagecache_get_page+0xe/0x30
[ 363.427048] alloc_extent_buffer+0x1cd/0x6a0
[ 363.435704] read_tree_block+0x43/0xc0
[ 363.443316] read_block_for_search+0x361/0x510
[ 363.466690] btrfs_search_slot+0xc8c/0x1520
This is caused by the mem_cgroup_handle_over_high() not respecting the
gfp_mask of the allocation context. We used to only call this function on
resume to userspace, where no locks were held. But c9afe31ec443 ("memcg:
synchronously enforce memory.high for large overcharges") added a call
from the allocation context without considering the gfp.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230914152139.100822-1-hannes@cmpxchg.org
Fixes: c9afe31ec443 ("memcg: synchronously enforce memory.high for large overcharges")
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Reported-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Reported-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> [5.17+]
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
include/linux/memcontrol.h | 4 ++--
include/linux/resume_user_mode.h | 2 +-
mm/memcontrol.c | 6 +++---
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h~mm-memcontrol-fix-gfp_nofs-recursion-in-memoryhigh-enforcement
+++ a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -920,7 +920,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_get_zone_lru_si
return READ_ONCE(mz->lru_zone_size[zone_idx][lru]);
}
-void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(void);
+void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(gfp_t gfp_mask);
unsigned long mem_cgroup_get_max(struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
@@ -1458,7 +1458,7 @@ static inline void mem_cgroup_unlock_pag
rcu_read_unlock();
}
-static inline void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(void)
+static inline void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(gfp_t gfp_mask)
{
}
--- a/include/linux/resume_user_mode.h~mm-memcontrol-fix-gfp_nofs-recursion-in-memoryhigh-enforcement
+++ a/include/linux/resume_user_mode.h
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ static inline void resume_user_mode_work
}
#endif
- mem_cgroup_handle_over_high();
+ mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(GFP_KERNEL);
blkcg_maybe_throttle_current();
rseq_handle_notify_resume(NULL, regs);
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c~mm-memcontrol-fix-gfp_nofs-recursion-in-memoryhigh-enforcement
+++ a/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -2555,7 +2555,7 @@ static unsigned long calculate_high_dela
* Scheduled by try_charge() to be executed from the userland return path
* and reclaims memory over the high limit.
*/
-void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(void)
+void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(gfp_t gfp_mask)
{
unsigned long penalty_jiffies;
unsigned long pflags;
@@ -2583,7 +2583,7 @@ retry_reclaim:
*/
nr_reclaimed = reclaim_high(memcg,
in_retry ? SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX : nr_pages,
- GFP_KERNEL);
+ gfp_mask);
/*
* memory.high is breached and reclaim is unable to keep up. Throttle
@@ -2819,7 +2819,7 @@ done_restock:
if (current->memcg_nr_pages_over_high > MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH &&
!(current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) &&
gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask)) {
- mem_cgroup_handle_over_high();
+ mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(gfp_mask);
}
return 0;
}
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from hannes@cmpxchg.org are
reply other threads:[~2023-09-19 20:22 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=20230919202213.21CD0C433C9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mm-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--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.