From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>,
SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 6.6.y 3/4] mm/kmemleak: avoid soft lockup when scanning task stacks
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 18:31:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260903223129.1741728-3-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260903223129.1741728-1-sashal@kernel.org>
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
[ Upstream commit 5d10d4e19e6daa487f0cd0ea6cba472325de92f9 ]
Patch series "mm/kmemleak: avoid soft lockup when scanning task", v3.
kmemleak_scan() scans every task stack under one rcu_read_lock() with no
reschedule point, which can trip the soft lockup watchdog on hosts with
very many threads.
That prints the following message, depending on the workload+host
configuration:
watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#35 stuck for 22s! [kmemleak:537]
scan_block
kmemleak_scan
kmemleak_scan_thread
kthread
Patch 1 walks the tasks with find_ge_pid() so the scan reschedules between
tasks
Patches 2-3 let the scan loops stop early once a scan is interrupted.
This patch (of 3):
kmemleak_scan() walks every thread and scans its kernel stack under a
single rcu_read_lock() with no reschedule point. On a host with very many
threads -- amplified by KASAN/lockdep in debug builds -- this loop can hog
a CPU long enough to trip the soft lockup watchdog:
watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#35 stuck for 22s! [kmemleak:537]
scan_block
kmemleak_scan
kmemleak_scan_thread
kthread
A cond_resched() cannot be added directly: the loop runs inside an RCU
read-side critical section.
Walk the tasks one PID at a time with find_ge_pid(), taking the RCU read
lock only to look up and pin each task. The stack is then scanned with no
lock held, so cond_resched() runs between tasks and the scan stops early
on scan_should_stop(). This follows the next_tgid()/task_seq_get_next()
iteration pattern and keeps each RCU critical section short.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20260615-kmemleak-stack-resched-v3-0-acecd7d7fd92@debian.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20260615-kmemleak-stack-resched-v3-1-acecd7d7fd92@debian.org
Fixes: c4b28963fd79 ("mm/kmemleak: rely on rcu for task stack scanning")
Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Reviewed-by: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Stable-dep-of: 3541a2b06ecd ("mm/kmemleak: report RCU-tasks quiescent states during the scan")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
mm/kmemleak.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c
index 91edbc95a1c0f..eb55dea0db028 100644
--- a/mm/kmemleak.c
+++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
@@ -1322,16 +1322,17 @@ static int scan_should_stop(void)
/*
* Scan a memory block (exclusive range) for valid pointers and add those
- * found to the gray list.
+ * found to the gray list. Return non-zero if the scan was interrupted.
*/
-static void scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
- struct kmemleak_object *scanned)
+static int scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
+ struct kmemleak_object *scanned)
{
unsigned long *ptr;
unsigned long *start = PTR_ALIGN(_start, BYTES_PER_POINTER);
unsigned long *end = _end - (BYTES_PER_POINTER - 1);
unsigned long flags;
unsigned long untagged_ptr;
+ int stop = 0;
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&kmemleak_lock, flags);
for (ptr = start; ptr < end; ptr++) {
@@ -1339,8 +1340,10 @@ static void scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
unsigned long pointer;
unsigned long excess_ref;
- if (scan_should_stop())
+ if (scan_should_stop()) {
+ stop = 1;
break;
+ }
kasan_disable_current();
pointer = *(unsigned long *)kasan_reset_tag((void *)ptr);
@@ -1392,22 +1395,28 @@ static void scan_block(void *_start, void *_end,
}
}
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&kmemleak_lock, flags);
+
+ return stop;
}
/*
* Scan a large memory block in MAX_SCAN_SIZE chunks to reduce the latency.
+ * Return non-zero if the scan was interrupted.
*/
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
-static void scan_large_block(void *start, void *end)
+static int scan_large_block(void *start, void *end)
{
void *next;
while (start < end) {
next = min(start + MAX_SCAN_SIZE, end);
- scan_block(start, next, NULL);
+ if (scan_block(start, next, NULL))
+ return 1;
start = next;
cond_resched();
}
+
+ return 0;
}
#endif
@@ -1538,6 +1547,43 @@ static void kmemleak_cond_resched(struct kmemleak_object *object)
put_object(object);
}
+/*
+ * Scan all task kernel stacks, rescheduling between tasks. Each task is looked
+ * up and pinned within its own RCU read-side section, so no lock is held across
+ * the scan and the walk cannot trip the soft lockup watchdog.
+ */
+static void kmemleak_scan_task_stacks(void)
+{
+ struct pid *pid;
+ int nr = 1;
+ int stop = 0;
+
+ do {
+ struct task_struct *p = NULL;
+
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ pid = find_ge_pid(nr, &init_pid_ns);
+ if (pid) {
+ nr = pid_nr(pid) + 1;
+ p = pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID);
+ if (p)
+ get_task_struct(p);
+ }
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+
+ if (p) {
+ void *stack = try_get_task_stack(p);
+
+ if (stack) {
+ stop = scan_block(stack, stack + THREAD_SIZE, NULL);
+ put_task_stack(p);
+ }
+ put_task_struct(p);
+ }
+ cond_resched();
+ } while (pid && !stop);
+}
+
/*
* Scan data sections and all the referenced memory blocks allocated via the
* kernel's standard allocators. This function must be called with the
@@ -1549,6 +1595,7 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
struct zone *zone;
int __maybe_unused i;
int new_leaks = 0;
+ int stop = 0;
jiffies_last_scan = jiffies;
@@ -1592,9 +1639,11 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
/* per-cpu sections scanning */
- for_each_possible_cpu(i)
- scan_large_block(__per_cpu_start + per_cpu_offset(i),
- __per_cpu_end + per_cpu_offset(i));
+ for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
+ if (scan_large_block(__per_cpu_start + per_cpu_offset(i),
+ __per_cpu_end + per_cpu_offset(i)))
+ goto scan_gray;
+ }
#endif
/*
@@ -1621,32 +1670,28 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
/* only scan if page is in use */
if (page_count(page) == 0)
continue;
- scan_block(page, page + 1, NULL);
+ stop = scan_block(page, page + 1, NULL);
+ if (stop)
+ break;
}
+ if (stop)
+ break;
}
put_online_mems();
+ if (stop)
+ goto scan_gray;
/*
* Scanning the task stacks (may introduce false negatives).
*/
- if (kmemleak_stack_scan) {
- struct task_struct *p, *g;
-
- rcu_read_lock();
- for_each_process_thread(g, p) {
- void *stack = try_get_task_stack(p);
- if (stack) {
- scan_block(stack, stack + THREAD_SIZE, NULL);
- put_task_stack(p);
- }
- }
- rcu_read_unlock();
- }
+ if (kmemleak_stack_scan)
+ kmemleak_scan_task_stacks();
/*
* Scan the objects already referenced from the sections scanned
* above.
*/
+scan_gray:
scan_gray_list();
/*
--
2.53.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-03 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-03 10:47 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] mm/kmemleak: report RCU-tasks quiescent states during the" failed to apply to 6.6-stable tree gregkh
2026-09-03 22:31 ` [PATCH 6.6.y 1/4] kmemleak: drop (age <increasing>) from leak record Sasha Levin
2026-09-03 22:31 ` [PATCH 6.6.y 2/4] kmemleak: avoid RCU stalls when freeing metadata for per-CPU pointers Sasha Levin
2026-09-03 22:31 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2026-09-03 22:31 ` [PATCH 6.6.y 4/4] mm/kmemleak: report RCU-tasks quiescent states during the scan Sasha Levin
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=20260903223129.1741728-3-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=sj@kernel.org \
--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.