From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
To: Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6.27-rc4] SLUB list_lock vs obj_hash.lock...
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 07:34:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080823053443.GA9209@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6278d2220808221448l24e98c61t83a2680f9df314f2@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 11:48 PM, Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@gmail.com> wrote:
> When booting 2.6.27-rc4 with SLUB and debug_objects=1, we see (after
> some activity) lock ordering issues with obj_hash.lock and SLUB's
> list_lock [1].
That's quite funny :-)
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc4-224c #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> hald/4680 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&n->list_lock){++..}, at: [<ffffffff802bfa26>] add_partial+0x26/0x80
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&obj_hash[i].lock){++..}, at: [<ffffffff8041cfdc>]
> debug_object_free+0x5c/0x120
It seems to be a similar problem as before, except that this is the free path, and not alloc.
You might try the appended patch -- but it's completely untested on my end!
What it does is to move the actual freeing until after we've released the hash-entry lock. In the cases of multiple objects freed, we enqueue all the objects on a local list.
Also added Thomas to Cc.
Vegard
PS: Why are you the only one seeing these things? Does debug_objects=1 need to be passed to activate this code, or can a CONFIG also be used?
diff --git a/lib/debugobjects.c b/lib/debugobjects.c
index 45a6bde..9d8161f 100644
--- a/lib/debugobjects.c
+++ b/lib/debugobjects.c
@@ -171,19 +171,28 @@ static void debug_objects_oom(void)
{
struct debug_bucket *db = obj_hash;
struct hlist_node *node, *tmp;
+ HLIST_HEAD(freelist);
struct debug_obj *obj;
unsigned long flags;
int i;
printk(KERN_WARNING "ODEBUG: Out of memory. ODEBUG disabled\n");
+ /* XXX: Could probably be optimized by transplantation of more than
+ * one entry at a time. */
for (i = 0; i < ODEBUG_HASH_SIZE; i++, db++) {
spin_lock_irqsave(&db->lock, flags);
hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &db->list, node) {
hlist_del(&obj->node);
- free_object(obj);
+ hlist_add_head(&obj->node, &freelist);
}
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&db->lock, flags);
+
+ /* Now free them */
+ hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &freelist, node) {
+ hlist_del(&obj->node);
+ free_object(obj);
+ }
}
}
@@ -498,8 +507,9 @@ void debug_object_free(void *addr, struct debug_obj_descr *descr)
return;
default:
hlist_del(&obj->node);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&db->lock, flags);
free_object(obj);
- break;
+ return;
}
out_unlock:
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&db->lock, flags);
@@ -510,6 +520,7 @@ static void __debug_check_no_obj_freed(const void *address, unsigned long size)
{
unsigned long flags, oaddr, saddr, eaddr, paddr, chunks;
struct hlist_node *node, *tmp;
+ HLIST_HEAD(freelist);
struct debug_obj_descr *descr;
enum debug_obj_state state;
struct debug_bucket *db;
@@ -545,11 +556,18 @@ repeat:
goto repeat;
default:
hlist_del(&obj->node);
- free_object(obj);
+ hlist_add_head(&obj->node, &freelist);
break;
}
}
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&db->lock, flags);
+
+ /* Now free them */
+ hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &freelist, node) {
+ hlist_del(&obj->node);
+ free_object(obj);
+ }
+
if (cnt > debug_objects_maxchain)
debug_objects_maxchain = cnt;
}
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-23 5:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-22 21:48 [2.6.27-rc4] SLUB list_lock vs obj_hash.lock Daniel J Blueman
2008-08-23 5:34 ` Vegard Nossum [this message]
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=20080823053443.GA9209@localhost.localdomain \
--to=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel.blueman@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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