linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.com, computersforpeace@gmail.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, lkp@01.org, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com,
	yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	bsegall@google.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, sp@datera.io, daniel@numascale.com,
	tj@kernel.org, subbaram@codeaurora.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, fengguang.wu@intel.com,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	pjt@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kthread: kthread_bind fails to enforce CPU affinity (fixes kernel BUG at kernel/smpboot.c:134!)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 08:54:05 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141208085405.730577a3@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1418009221-12719-1-git-send-email-anton@samba.org>

On Mon,  8 Dec 2014 14:27:01 +1100
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org> wrote:

> I have a busy ppc64le KVM box where guests sometimes hit the infamous
> "kernel BUG at kernel/smpboot.c:134!" issue during boot:
> 
> BUG_ON(td->cpu != smp_processor_id());
> 
> Basically a per CPU hotplug thread scheduled on the wrong CPU. The oops
> output confirms it:
> 
> CPU: 0
> Comm: watchdog/130
> 
> The issue is in kthread_bind where we set the cpus_allowed mask, but do
> not touch task_thread_info(p)->cpu. The scheduler assumes the previously
> scheduled CPU is in the cpus_allowed mask, but in this case we are
> moving a thread to another CPU so it is not.
> 

Does this happen always on boot up, and always with the watchdog thread?

I followed the logic that starts the watchdog threads.

watchdog_enable_all_cpus()
  smpboot_register_percpu-thread() {

    for_each_online_cpu(cpu) { ... }

Where watchdog_enable_all_cpus() can be called by
lockup_detector_init() before SMP is started, but also by
proc_dowatchdog() which is called by the sysctl commands (after SMP is
up and running).

I noticed there's no "get_online_cpus()" anywhere, although the
unregister_percpu_thread() has it. Is it possible that we created a
thread on a CPU that wasn't fully online yet?

Perhaps the following patch is needed? Even if this isn't the solution
to this bug, it is probably needed as watchdog_enable_all_cpus() can be
called after boot up too.

-- Steve

diff --git a/kernel/smpboot.c b/kernel/smpboot.c
index eb89e1807408..60d35ac5d3f1 100644
--- a/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -279,6 +279,7 @@ int smpboot_register_percpu_thread(struct smp_hotplug_thread *plug_thread)
 	unsigned int cpu;
 	int ret = 0;
 
+	get_online_cpus();
 	mutex_lock(&smpboot_threads_lock);
 	for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
 		ret = __smpboot_create_thread(plug_thread, cpu);
@@ -291,6 +292,7 @@ int smpboot_register_percpu_thread(struct smp_hotplug_thread *plug_thread)
 	list_add(&plug_thread->list, &hotplug_threads);
 out:
 	mutex_unlock(&smpboot_threads_lock);
+	put_online_cpus();
 	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(smpboot_register_percpu_thread);

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-12-08 14:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-08  3:27 [PATCH] kthread: kthread_bind fails to enforce CPU affinity (fixes kernel BUG at kernel/smpboot.c:134!) Anton Blanchard
2014-12-08  4:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-12-08  4:46   ` Anton Blanchard
2014-12-08  8:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-12-08 10:18   ` Anton Blanchard
2014-12-08 23:58     ` [PATCH] powerpc: secondary CPUs signal to master before setting active and online " Anton Blanchard
2014-12-09 20:54       ` Linus Torvalds
2014-12-10 14:08         ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-12-10 23:06         ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-08 13:54 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2014-12-09  2:24   ` [PATCH] kthread: kthread_bind fails to enforce CPU affinity " Lai Jiangshan

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=20141208085405.730577a3@gandalf.local.home \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel@numascale.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=lkp@01.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=sp@datera.io \
    --cc=subbaram@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=yuyang.du@intel.com \
    /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).