From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: slub/debugobjects: lockup when freeing memory
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 15:04:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140619220449.GT4904@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1406192331250.5170@nanos>
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:32:41PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:37:17PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:29:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > Well, no. Look at the callchain:
> > > > >
> > > > > __call_rcu
> > > > > debug_object_activate
> > > > > rcuhead_fixup_activate
> > > > > debug_object_init
> > > > > kmem_cache_alloc
> > > > >
> > > > > So call rcu activates the object, but the object has no reference in
> > > > > the debug objects code so the fixup code is called which inits the
> > > > > object and allocates a reference ....
> > > >
> > > > OK, got it. And you are right, call_rcu() has done this for a very
> > > > long time, so not sure what changed. But it seems like the right
> > > > approach is to provide a debug-object-free call_rcu_alloc() for use
> > > > by the memory allocators.
> > > >
> > > > Seem reasonable? If so, please see the following patch.
> > >
> > > Not really, you're torpedoing the whole purpose of debugobjects :)
> > >
> > > So, why can't we just init the rcu head when the stuff is created?
> >
> > That would allow me to keep my code unchanged, so I am in favor. ;-)
>
> Almost unchanged. You need to provide a function to do so, i.e. make
> use of
>
> debug_init_rcu_head()
You mean like this?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
rcu: Export debug_init_rcu_head() and and debug_init_rcu_head()
Currently, call_rcu() relies on implicit allocation and initialization
for the debug-objects handling of RCU callbacks. If you hammer the
kernel hard enough with Sasha's modified version of trinity, you can end
up with the sl*b allocators recursing into themselves via this implicit
call_rcu() allocation.
This commit therefore exports the debug_init_rcu_head() and
debug_rcu_head_free() functions, which permits the allocators to allocated
and pre-initialize the debug-objects information, so that there no longer
any need for call_rcu() to do that initialization, which in turn prevents
the recursion into the memory allocators.
Reported-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 063a6bf1a2b6..34ae5c376e35 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -358,9 +358,19 @@ void wait_rcu_gp(call_rcu_func_t crf);
* initialization.
*/
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD
+void debug_init_rcu_head(struct rcu_head *head);
+void debug_rcu_head_free(struct rcu_head *head);
void init_rcu_head_on_stack(struct rcu_head *head);
void destroy_rcu_head_on_stack(struct rcu_head *head);
#else /* !CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD */
+static inline void debug_init_rcu_head(struct rcu_head *head)
+{
+}
+
+static inline void debug_rcu_head_free(struct rcu_head *head)
+{
+}
+
static inline void init_rcu_head_on_stack(struct rcu_head *head)
{
}
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/update.c b/kernel/rcu/update.c
index a2aeb4df0f60..a41c81a26506 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/update.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/update.c
@@ -200,12 +200,12 @@ void wait_rcu_gp(call_rcu_func_t crf)
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(wait_rcu_gp);
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD
-static inline void debug_init_rcu_head(struct rcu_head *head)
+void debug_init_rcu_head(struct rcu_head *head)
{
debug_object_init(head, &rcuhead_debug_descr);
}
-static inline void debug_rcu_head_free(struct rcu_head *head)
+void debug_rcu_head_free(struct rcu_head *head)
{
debug_object_free(head, &rcuhead_debug_descr);
}
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-19 22:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-19 14:30 slub/debugobjects: lockup when freeing memory Sasha Levin
2014-06-19 15:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-06-19 16:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-06-19 19:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-06-19 20:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-06-19 20:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-06-19 20:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-08-18 16:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-08-19 3:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-08-19 3:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-08-20 2:00 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-08-20 2:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-08-20 6:01 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-08-20 12:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-06-19 20:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-06-19 20:32 ` Sasha Levin
2014-06-19 20:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-06-19 20:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-06-19 20:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-06-19 21:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-06-19 22:04 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-06-20 8:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-06-20 15:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-12 18:03 ` Sasha Levin
2014-07-12 19:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-06-20 14:30 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-06-19 20:42 ` Sasha Levin
2014-06-19 20:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20140619220449.GT4904@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).