From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20A58CA6F; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 02:55:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722308113; cv=none; b=BqZKPMsp6fNmKDC37H9We5IwaNg+P9wLAosmkuOFt0O05aggT4dYlDyuwoo2bKdcsO8Vd9YTg6oRvffNSTStB2dWzQT+vMVUPPlGLRf9gtQjqjGOMr1ttcE375Q0mqNJcrLRTh0iHJ0+c/6Eu5FIPP3LkjQTGW8iZzumRyvuJAQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722308113; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ggTULUx/cgLYPQgUXYAYMtqgXzl0s0ytU7ZJQllJKWg=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ioGKoNU1bu5UmKZutM42u/Lx7Bxb4qMh00UdMo9qx5ykmUinQzOURQCUWeDbEQCJqISoM60l0FbnQICaikDKCgHQAPeUrKCi/I9ULzc7r0VDXPmBMbRfm1iu50+iNuehLYMstpvXZz4V3220UoHA3tX7w4j9lECfc0mUzjgAQl4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.174]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4WY08n2SdwzQn9M; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:50:49 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemd100013.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.221.188.163]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D020E140417; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:55:06 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.109.79] (10.67.109.79) by kwepemd100013.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.163) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.34; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:55:06 +0800 Message-ID: <425f1151-14e6-43f6-810e-efe95f6f401e@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:55:05 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: fix panic caused by partcmd_update To: Waiman Long , , , , , CC: , , References: <20240730015316.2324188-1-chenridong@huawei.com> <0ba00b7c-5292-4242-b648-4ca8d4a457c6@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US From: chenridong In-Reply-To: <0ba00b7c-5292-4242-b648-4ca8d4a457c6@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.180) To kwepemd100013.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.163) On 2024/7/30 10:34, Waiman Long wrote: > On 7/29/24 21:53, Chen Ridong wrote: >> We find a bug as below: >> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: 00000003 >> PGD 0 P4D 0 >> Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI >> CPU: 3 PID: 358 Comm: bash Tainted: G        W I        6.6.0-10893-g60d6 >> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/4 >> RIP: 0010:partition_sched_domains_locked+0x483/0x600 >> Code: 01 48 85 d2 74 0d 48 83 05 29 3f f8 03 01 f3 48 0f bc c2 89 c0 48 9 >> RSP: 0018:ffffc90000fdbc58 EFLAGS: 00000202 >> RAX: 0000000100000003 RBX: ffff888100b3dfa0 RCX: 0000000000000000 >> RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 000000000002fe80 >> RBP: ffff888100b3dfb0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000 >> R10: ffffc90000fdbcb0 R11: 0000000000000004 R12: 0000000000000002 >> R13: ffff888100a92b48 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 >> FS:  00007f44a5425740(0000) GS:ffff888237d80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000 >> CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 >> CR2: 0000000100030973 CR3: 000000010722c000 CR4: 00000000000006e0 >> Call Trace: >>   >>   ? show_regs+0x8c/0xa0 >>   ? __die_body+0x23/0xa0 >>   ? __die+0x3a/0x50 >>   ? page_fault_oops+0x1d2/0x5c0 >>   ? partition_sched_domains_locked+0x483/0x600 >>   ? search_module_extables+0x2a/0xb0 >>   ? search_exception_tables+0x67/0x90 >>   ? kernelmode_fixup_or_oops+0x144/0x1b0 >>   ? __bad_area_nosemaphore+0x211/0x360 >>   ? up_read+0x3b/0x50 >>   ? bad_area_nosemaphore+0x1a/0x30 >>   ? exc_page_fault+0x890/0xd90 >>   ? __lock_acquire.constprop.0+0x24f/0x8d0 >>   ? __lock_acquire.constprop.0+0x24f/0x8d0 >>   ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 >>   ? partition_sched_domains_locked+0x483/0x600 >>   ? partition_sched_domains_locked+0xf0/0x600 >>   rebuild_sched_domains_locked+0x806/0xdc0 >>   update_partition_sd_lb+0x118/0x130 >>   cpuset_write_resmask+0xffc/0x1420 >>   cgroup_file_write+0xb2/0x290 >>   kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x194/0x290 >>   new_sync_write+0xeb/0x160 >>   vfs_write+0x16f/0x1d0 >>   ksys_write+0x81/0x180 >>   __x64_sys_write+0x21/0x30 >>   x64_sys_call+0x2f25/0x4630 >>   do_syscall_64+0x44/0xb0 >>   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x78/0xe2 >> RIP: 0033:0x7f44a553c887 >> >> It can be reproduced with cammands: >> cd /sys/fs/cgroup/ >> mkdir test >> cd test/ >> echo +cpuset > ../cgroup.subtree_control >> echo root > cpuset.cpus.partition >> echo 0-3 > cpuset.cpus // 3 is nproc > What do you mean by "3 is nproc"? Are there only 3 CPUs in the system? > What are the value of /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset.cpu*? Yes, I tested it with qemu, only 3 cpus are available. # cat /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset.cpus.effective 0-3 This case is taking all cpus away from root, test should fail to be a valid root, it should not rebuild scheduling domains. >> >> This issue is caused by the incorrect rebuilding of scheduling domains. >> In this scenario, test/cpuset.cpus.partition should be an invalid root >> and should not trigger the rebuilding of scheduling domains. When calling >> update_parent_effective_cpumask with partcmd_update, if newmask is not >> null, it should recheck newmask whether there are cpus is available >> for parect/cs that has tasks. >> >> Fixes: 0c7f293efc87 ("cgroup/cpuset: Add >> cpuset.cpus.exclusive.effective for v2") >> Signed-off-by: Chen Ridong >> --- >>   kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 2 ++ >>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c >> index 40ec4abaf440..a9b6d56eeffa 100644 >> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c >> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c >> @@ -1991,6 +1991,8 @@ static int >> update_parent_effective_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, int cmd, >>               part_error = PERR_CPUSEMPTY; >>               goto write_error; >>           } >> +        /* Check newmask again, whether cpus are available for >> parent/cs */ >> +        nocpu |= tasks_nocpu_error(parent, cs, newmask); >>           /* >>            * partcmd_update with newmask: > > The code change looks reasonable to me. However, I would like to know > more about the reproduction steps. > > Cheers, > Longman > >