linux-um archives
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Toralf Förster" <toralf.foerster@gmx.de>,
	"Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod.at>, "Jan Kara" <jack@suse.cz>,
	"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	"UML devel" <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, darrick.wong@oracle.com,
	"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] writeback: fix negative bdi max pause
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 14:34:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131014123426.GG19604@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131012044517.GA32048@localhost>

On Sat 12-10-13 12:45:17, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> Toralf runs trinity on UML/i386.
> After some time it hangs and the last message line is
> 
> 	BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 22s! [trinity-child0:1521]
> 
> It's found that pages_dirtied becomes very large.
> More than 1000000000 pages in this case:
> 
> 	period = HZ * pages_dirtied / task_ratelimit;
> 	BUG_ON(pages_dirtied > 2000000000);
> 	BUG_ON(pages_dirtied > 1000000000);      <---------
> 
> UML debug printf shows that we got negative pause here:
> 
> 	ick: pause : -984
> 	ick: pages_dirtied : 0
> 	ick: task_ratelimit: 0
> 
> 	 pause:
> 	+       if (pause < 0)  {
> 	+               extern int printf(char *, ...);
> 	+               printf("ick : pause : %li\n", pause);
> 	+               printf("ick: pages_dirtied : %lu\n", pages_dirtied);
> 	+               printf("ick: task_ratelimit: %lu\n", task_ratelimit);
> 	+               BUG_ON(1);
> 	+       }
> 	        trace_balance_dirty_pages(bdi,
> 
> Since pause is bounded by [min_pause, max_pause] where min_pause is also
> bounded by max_pause. It's suspected and demonstrated that the max_pause
> calculation goes wrong:
> 
> 	ick: pause : -717
> 	ick: min_pause : -177
> 	ick: max_pause : -717
> 	ick: pages_dirtied : 14
> 	ick: task_ratelimit: 0
> 
> The problem lies in the two "long = unsigned long" assignments in
> bdi_max_pause() which might go negative if the highest bit is 1, and
> the min_t(long, ...) check failed to protect it falling under 0. Fix
> all of them by using "unsigned long" throughout the function.
> 
> Reported-by: Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
> Tested-by: Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
  The patch looks good. You can add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

								Honza

> ---
>  mm/page-writeback.c |   10 +++++-----
>  mm/readahead.c      |    2 +-
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
>  Changes since v1: Add CC list.
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> index 3f0c895..241a746 100644
> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> @@ -1104,11 +1104,11 @@ static unsigned long dirty_poll_interval(unsigned long dirty,
>  	return 1;
>  }
>  
> -static long bdi_max_pause(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
> -			  unsigned long bdi_dirty)
> +static unsigned long bdi_max_pause(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
> +				   unsigned long bdi_dirty)
>  {
> -	long bw = bdi->avg_write_bandwidth;
> -	long t;
> +	unsigned long bw = bdi->avg_write_bandwidth;
> +	unsigned long t;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Limit pause time for small memory systems. If sleeping for too long
> @@ -1120,7 +1120,7 @@ static long bdi_max_pause(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
>  	t = bdi_dirty / (1 + bw / roundup_pow_of_two(1 + HZ / 8));
>  	t++;
>  
> -	return min_t(long, t, MAX_PAUSE);
> +	return min_t(unsigned long, t, MAX_PAUSE);
>  }
>  
>  static long bdi_min_pause(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR


  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-14 12:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-02 18:30 [uml-devel] BUG: soft lockup for a user mode linux image Toralf Förster
2013-10-02 18:31 ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-02 19:55 ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 18:54   ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-03 19:04     ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 19:16       ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-03 19:20         ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 19:33           ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-04  5:52             ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-06 14:17               ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-06 18:38                 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-06 20:08                   ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-06 20:26                     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-06 21:01                       ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-08 20:07                         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-09 17:26                           ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-09 18:43                             ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-09 21:47                               ` Jan Kara
2013-10-09 22:33                                 ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-10 16:49                                   ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-11  1:16                                     ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  8:42                                       ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-11  8:57                                         ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  9:05                                           ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11 14:12                                           ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-12  0:43                                             ` [PATCH] writeback: fix negative bdi max pause Fengguang Wu
2013-10-12  4:45                                             ` [PATCH v2] " Fengguang Wu
2013-10-14 12:34                                               ` Jan Kara [this message]
2013-10-10  2:46                                 ` [uml-devel] BUG: soft lockup for a user mode linux image Fengguang Wu
2013-10-10  6:52                                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-10  7:03                                     ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-08 19:56                       ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-09 10:35                         ` stian

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=20131014123426.GG19604@quack.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=toralf.foerster@gmx.de \
    --cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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